1961-05-04

[Stage Direction]
Tenth report of standing committee on standing orders-Miss Aitken.


Hon. J. A. MacLean (for the Minister of Agriculture) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-89 to amend the Criminal Code (race meetings).
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East):: May I,
in addressing a question to the Prime Minister, presume it is a fact that he has received the report of Professor Bladen, the royal commissioner inquiring into the state of the automobile industry. If this is the case, in view of the importance of this report to the riding I represent in this house, may I ask the Prime Minister when we may expect that this report will be tabled?


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: In due course, Mr. Speaker.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I ask the Prime Minister to answer the first part of my question. Is it a fact that he has received the report?


John George Diefenbaker: The answer I gave indicated that I had.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, now that the Prime Minister has indicated that he has the Bladen commission report, may I ask him whether it is the intention of the government to withhold this report from the house until after the Department of Trade and Commerce estimates have been passed? These estimates are now under discussion, and this report should now be before the house.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, the report of the Bladen royal commission has nothing to do with the Department of Trade and Commerce. I should consider that it is mainly concerned with fiscal matters and the like.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Does the Prime Minister not realize that the automobile industry is a very-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Both the question and the answer are more in the nature of a debate as to the relevancy of this report, and not appropriate for the orders of the day.


Paul Joseph James Martin: May I, on a point of order and with great respect, suggest that this is such a vital matter that a question of this kind should be dealt with. Surely I am entitled to ask the Prime Minister whether he does not think that this matter affecting the automobile industry is one involving a matter of trade as well as one of concern to the Department of Finance.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member has asked the question and received an answer. In my view both the question and the answer were opinions and not questions of fact.



BARBITURATES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Theogene Ricard (St. Hyacinlhe-Bagol):: I wish to address a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Is the hon. gentleman yet in a position to advise the house what action is planned to meet the growing problem of goof balls?


Hon. J. W. Monteith (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, I have been investigating this situation for some months in co-operation with my colleague the Minister of Justice. As I advised the hon. member for Outremont-St. Jean, an interdepartmental committee was formed to assess the various courses of action open to us, and I hope to present appropriate amendments to the Food and Drugs Act to the house very soon.



PROPOSED LIMITATION OF PRODUCTION OF NARCOTICS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question

Inquiries of the Ministry to the Minister of National Health and Welfare, of which I gave notice. Is the minister in a position to inform the house whether there will be any early ratification by Canada of the new narcotics treaty agreed upon by the 108 nations represented at the recent narcotics conference called by the world health organization at the United Nations, in which Canada played such a prominent part?


Jay Waldo Monteith: Mr. Speaker, a formal copy of the single convention on this subject was received from the United Nations only within the past few days. The contents are now being reviewed with regard to possible ratification by Canada, a course that I feel sure will be followed.



PRODUCTIVITY COUNCIL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hubert Badanai (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. I should like to ask the minister whether any consideration is being given to the inclusion of representatives of the major industrial unions on the productivity council.


Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I am afraid I could not understand the hon. member's question and would ask that he repeat it, or suggest that I could take it as notice and provide an answer tomorrow.


Hubert Badanai: I should like to ask the minister whether any consideration is being given to the inclusion of representatives of the major industrial unions on the productivity council.


George Harris Hees: Yes, Mr. Speaker. They are represented by Mr. Jodoin, the head of the Canadian Labour Congress and others.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Miss Judy V. LaMarsh (Niagara Falls):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Has the minister received information to the effect that notwithstanding his assurance given to members of the unemployed delegation who visited Ottawa ten days ago, they have been deprived of their unemployment insurance benefits for the day of that visit?


Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour):: Yes, Mr. Speaker, and I have turned the correspondence over to the unemployment

insurance commission in an attempt to discover whether there is anything in the act which will enable us to settle this matter satisfactorily.


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I should like to ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will the minister assure the house that those individuals who have already been deprived of the day's benefits will have those benefits reinstated?


Michael Starr: I cannot give that assurance until I receive a report from the unemployment insurance commission.



THE SENATE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. P. Deschateleis (Maisonneuve-Rose-mont):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Following a press report which appeared in the Montreal Star to the effect that upper house reforms are expected soon in the United Kingdom, is the Prime Minister in a position to say whether similar reforms can be expected here?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member is perhaps not asking a question of great urgency in view of the history of the subject. In any event, I think he is asking for a declaration of policy. I do not wish to prevent the Prime Minister from answering, but in my view that is not a proper question for orders of the day.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Speaker, on the point of order you have raised, I suggest that this is one promise made three years ago.


Mr. Speaker:: That fact does not support the hon. member's case.


Mr. Pickersgill:: On the point of order raised by the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rose-mont, this did seem to be a matter of urgency in 1957, and four years have now passed.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I do not want to answer the question, but the hon. gentleman raised a point of order and I might say that I recall very well the election of 1925 when Mr. Mackenzie King stated that if he was returned to power the Senate would be reformed immediately.
(Translation):



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerard Loiselle (St. Ann):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Could he

inform the house as to whether the government has taken measures to ensure the safety of Canadian missionaries in Cuba?
(Text):


Hon. Howard C. Green (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I dealt with this question briefly yesterday. Since then we have received no further report, but our embassy in Havana will certainly do anything it can to protect those Canadians.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Does the government intend to make any protest against the statement made by Premier Castro with regard to priests and others in Cuba, including Canadian priests, to whom he referred as scoundrels? Surely this country should protest to the Cuban government, whose members were referred to by the Minister of Trade and Commerce as good fellows.


Howard Charles Green: As I pointed out yesterday to the hon. member for Essex East, it is my belief that the statement made by Premier Castro referred to the Spanish born clergy. Certainly there is not very much point in stirring up a lot of trouble if that is the case. When we know the actual situation we shall certainly take the appropriate measures.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Those, too, are not scoundrels.


INQUIRY AS TO CURRENT SITUATION
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs whether he can confirm the report that there has been a cease fire arranged in the Laotian matter. Is it a fact that the truce commission on which Canada is represented is now moving from Delhi? Perhaps the minister could also say whether the truce commission will exercise any powers other than that of determining whether there has been a cease fire.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, the cease fire in Laos does appear to have become effective. As yet there have been no instructions from the two co-chairmen of the Geneva conference, namely the United Kingdom and the Soviet union, to the supervisory commission authorizing them to proceed to Laos. I am not yet in a position, either, to say what additional responsibilities will be placed on the shoulders of the members of the truce commission.
Inquiries of the Ministry LABOUR CONDITIONS


PICTOU, N.S.-REQUEST FOR PROVISION OF WORK FOR SHIPYARD
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Prime Minister, arising out of a serious unemployment situation in Pictou, Nova Scotia. In view of a recent letter from Mr. MacPhail, secretary of local 4702 of the united steel workers of America, addressed to the Prime Minister and dated April 24, pointing out existing unemployment in the shipyard of Ferguson Industries Limited, can the Prime Minister use his good offices to obtain a refit or a conversion for the Pictou shipyard, as requested in the letter?


Hon. Raymond O'Hurley (Minister of Defence Production):: As the distribution of refits and repairs comes under the Minister of Defence Production, I am looking into the matter to see what can be done for Ferguson Industries.


Hazen Robert Argue: Will the minister give a report to the house after he has made his inquiry?


Mr. O'Hurley:: Mr. Speaker, when I have a report from my shipbuilding branch as to the work going on at the present time at Ferguson Industries Limited and on what can be done at Ferguson's, I shall certainly report to the house.


PROPOSED JOINT CANADA-U.S. ORGANIZATION TO SOLVE UNEMPLOYMENT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gérard Loiselle: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Does the minister have a reply to my question of April 27 concerning the formation of a joint committee between Canada and the United States to find solutions to the unemployment problem?


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for St. Ann asked his question the other day while I was not in the house. It had to do with a press report that a joint organization had been set up by Canada and the United States to deal with unemployment. At the outset I wish to say that no formal organization of any kind was set up. Informal discussions took place while I was in Washington, and further exchanges of information have been provided for in the future.
4324	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry (Translation):



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. Pit Lessard (St. Henry):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Secretary of State. Is he aware that there is no French speaking representative on the advisory committee of the Glassco commission? If so, will be the Secretary of State see that this situation is corrected?


Hon. Noel Dorion (Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, I read in this morning's paper the report mentioned by the hon. member. First of all, I must tell him that Mr. Therien is the French speaking representative on the Glassco commission. I understand, however, that the hon. member refers to a sub-committee. I shall make inquiries, therefore, and provide an answer for my hon. friend as soon as I get the required information.
(Text):



PUBLIC WORKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Minister of Public Works, of which I have given notice. Is the minister in a position to reply to the urgent submission sent him from various organizations emphasizing the need for immediate consideration and action on the construction of a breakwater at Port Renfrew, San Juan bay, on Vancouver island?


Hon. D. J. Walker (Minister of Public Works):: I have been urged to construct a breakwater at Port Renfrew, San Juan bay, on Vancouver island, in conferences with Mr. George Chatterton who is, I believe, the reeve of Saanich. Within the past few days his representations have been supported by a brief signed by several organizations, and I want to assure you, Mr. Speaker, that careful consideration is being given to this matter. Government engineers are engaged in arriving at a decision on the facts, and in due course I will be very happy to inform the house.



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Hellyer (Trinity):: Mr. Speaker,
I should like to direct a question to the


parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Will the parliamentary secretary advise the house whether the department has taken any steps to restrict the wanderings of race track touts, hoodlums, bookmakers, con men and other undesirables across the Canada-United States border?


Mr. John Charlton (Parliamentary Secretary lo the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: I will take notice of the hon. member's question.



COMBINES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, on April 28 I asked the following question in the absence of the Minister of Justice:
In view of the news reports that the combines branch of the Department of Justice has just completed a report on an inquiry into Canadian drug prices which indicates that Canada's drug prices are the highest in the world, and in view of the great interest in and importance of this matter, does the restrictive trade practices commission intend to hold public hearings on this question in the near future?
The Solicitor General replied that he would take the question as notice and bring it to the attention of the Minister of Justice. Has the Minister of Justice considered this question, and can he give us a reply?


Hon. E. D. Fullon (Minister of Justice):: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I think the hon. gentleman will find that his question was covered fairly completely in the reply I gave to an oral question yesterday dealing with the same matter. The decision whether or not to hold public hearings is entirely one for the chairman of the restrictive trade practices commission. The act specifically provides that he and he alone determines whether hearings will be public, and so far he has given no indication that he intends to hold public hearings.



TELEVISION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Acting Minister of Transport to convey to the Minister of Transport a request for an answer at the earliest possible time to the question about the Kindersley satellite station for television purposes, to which question the minister had planned to give an answer on

Tuesday and was unable to reply, I believe, because he was not in the house at the time.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I am advised by those around me that the minister gave the answer to that question yesterday.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I thank the minister very much. I glanced hastily through Hansard and did not see it. I am sorry to have taken up the time of the house needlessly.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Flynn in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND COMMERCE General administration-
394. Departmental administration, including fees for membership in the international organizations listed in the details of the estimates (also includes the national industrial design council transferred from the national gallery), $3,275,445.


The Chairman:: This item will be found at page 74 of the blue book, the details at page 507.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, I have a question to put to the minister. I have been absent from Ottawa for a few days, but I read the minister's initial statement to the committee. Anything that has been done to increase Canadian exports to other countries is most welcome. My remarks are related to the field of industrial as well as agricultural products.
The contracts for the sale of Canadian products abroad, whether grain sales through the Canadian wheat board or sales of steel produced in Canadian mills, are contracts signed by the agencies involved. The minister's department, through the trade commissioners, has taken a very active interest in promoting Canadian trade and exports of all kinds. I should like from the minister an indication of what is involved in a general sense in trade commissioners promoting the sale of Canadian products. If it is possible for him to do so I should like the minister to inform the committee what part the trade commissioners play in the sale of grain, and whether any part was played by the commissioners in the preliminary stages preceding the signing of the grain agreement recently negotiated with China.


George Harris Hees: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I shall be glad to answer that question. In many cases our trade commissioners make the initial contacts for Canadian firms which are anxious to sell in foreign markets. The trade commissioners give Canadian firms preliminary information regarding freight rates, tariffs and
Supply-Trade and Commerce information concerning other pertinent matters before a deal is consummated. If necessary the trade commissioners act as interpreters between the Canadian businessman and the foreign customer. As I said yesterday in committee, the trade commissioners do everything except actually sign the deal. They may be compared with a catalyst in a chemical reaction which does everything except actually make the reaction.
Regarding sales of wheat, to which the hon. member for Assiniboia has referred, our trade commissioners are very active in the preliminary contacts with the government agencies of the foreign governments concerned. They act on behalf of the wheat board in the same way they do on behalf of Canadian business companies. In the case of the recent deal signed with China, our trade commissioners were very active indeed in making the initial contact and helping line up the deal.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate getting that information from the minister, because it means that the specific details of any contract, whether it be entered into by a private company or by the Canadian wheat board, are signed by the company involved. But as the minister himself said, the trade commissioners, as I would think they should, do everything in the promotion of these sales except sign on the dotted line.
I was very much interested in the statement about the sale of additional grain to China. The minister has at this time referred to the role his department played in this contract, as well as having referred to it on April 28. With regard to this sale of Canadian grain, as with a private sale if it should have been a private sale by any company, I wish to make it clear that we are in favour of this kind of increased trade in non-military products, no matter what the political complexion of the government involved.
If we are to hope that in the future these governments which are so much different than ours may come closer to the road to freedom, the way to encourage this, in our judgment, is to undertake this kind of agreement and negotiate a trade in non-strategic materials. We are happy that this is done with China, with Cuba or any other country, even though we may object very violently to the particular form of government in those countries.
A great deal has been said about this grain deal which was announced in the house on May 2. I read the reports in the western newspapers. I do not think any transaction has been undertaken in the field of trade which has been given more widespread or
4326	HOUSE OF
Supply-Trade and Commerce more favourable publicity than this particular transaction. I read all the reports I was able to find in all the different newspapers. I read that it was a sale of 186 million bushels of wheat and 46 million bushels of barley; that the sale was worth $362 million, and it would take place between June 1 this year and December, 1963. In my comments I was just as much in favour of it as any hon. member in this house. The president of the Saskatchewan wheat pool went so far as to say that this solved the grain problem for the farmers; that this would mean that the surplus of grain would be moved off the farms.
I was astounded to read the provisions of this agreement when I went over them in Hansard as set forth by the minister. I have never seen an instance in my experience in the house-and I think other members of parliament will agree-when the press gallery failed to see a joker in an announcement; and there is a big joker in this announcement.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Hazen Robert Argue: This is a firm agreement for the sale of 28 million bushels of wheat, 17 million bushels of barley and 1.5 million bushels transferred or related into flour. After that there is no firm agreement. There is certainly no firm agreement on behalf of China or the China Resources Company. As far as the future is concerned, these are the minister's words:
Each future contract will be negotiated in respect to price and quantity.
I put it to the Minister of Trade and Commerce that there is no guarantee, in this agreement which has been announced, for sales beyond the 28 million bushels of wheat. This is not what it has been dressed up to mean, a firm sale within a period from now to December, 1963, of these huge quantities of grain. I think in making the announcement the minister was really putting his public relations people to work, because they have blown up and exaggerated this agreement almost beyond recognition.
There is something firm in the agreement. It is firm, as I understand it. I should like to read the agreement; I think it should be produced.


An hon. Member:: What good will that do you?


Hazen Robert Argue: As I read the statement there is something firm in it. I will read the minister's words:
We have committed ourselves to provide up to six million tons of barley, wheat and flour.
That is the main agreement. Canada has been committed to provide but China is not committed to purchase that quantity, to say


nothing about the price. We had an experience in the uranium industry. Letters of intent were exchanged which seemed pretty firm. There is nothing nearly as firm in this agreement. I cannot see, from reading this agreement anything as firm as there was in the uranium deal. The uranium deal is not too firm at the moment, but it was certainly much firmer to begin with than this agreement.


Mr. Horner (Acadia):: This sounds like sour grapes.


Hazen Robert Argue: I am just telling the truth, and these are the facts.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: It is your truth.


Hazen Robert Argue: I put it to the minister that all that has been done in this agreement is that Canada agrees to keep the grain available, and China may or may not buy it. This is a storage policy for 158 million bushels, because 28 million bushels are being sold. This will provide for the storage within Canada of 158 million bushels of wheat earmarked for China, available to China, but of which China does not undertake to take delivery.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: That is a shocking line of reasoning for a Saskatchewan member of parliament.


Hazen Robert Argue: Never mind the line; these happen to be the facts. These facts have not been in the newspapers. These facts were not made very clear in the house. The hon. member for Acadia does not think of the facts.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: They were announced in the house and I heard them. You didn't; you were not even here.


Hazen Robert Argue: An announcement was made in the house and there was a press conference held afterward. Every newspaper says, "Terrific. We have made a deal for $362 million worth of grain". No such deal was made, none whatsoever.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Strictly sour grapes.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, I have the floor-


Jacques Flynn: Order.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Trade and Commerce may point out where I am in error, if he can. I challenge him to do it. I say the only thing which is firm in this agreement is that Canada undertakes to keep the grain in storage, available to China, but China does not agree to buy it. This is the flimsiest kind of transaction I have ever heard of. We used to have a wheat agreement with Britain. It was firm as to quantity; it was firm as to minimum price-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: We lost $600 million on it.


Hazen Robert Argue: Yes, sure; but we had these clauses in the agreement. There is nothing in this agreement even as firm as there was in that one.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Look at the-


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, I have the floor. My friend can make a speech when I sit down, and I will be very interested to hear it.


Jacques Flynn: Order. I ask hon. members to allow the hon. member who has the floor to express his views.


Hazen Robert Argue: I can understand the sensitivity of hon. members, because even the president of the Saskatchewan wheat pool thinks this is going to take all the grain off the farms and sweep all the granaries clean-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: You are afraid it will.


Hazen Robert Argue: -and he has been sold a bill of goods. I hope the granaries are swept clean from sales, and not because of drought.


Mr. Pascoe:: Can I ask the speaker a question?


Hazen Robert Argue: I would love it.
Mr Pascoe: Is the hon. member for Assini-boia attacking this agreement on behalf of the New party or personally?


Hazen Robert Argue: That is what you get from members on the opposite side. No contribution to the debate, no statement-


Mr. Drysdale:: And no answer.


Hazen Robert Argue: We should like to hear from the minister on behalf of the government whether or not $362 million worth of Canadian grain will be sold, and I say there is no such assurance and no such agreement. In the past this government has turned down an opportunity to sell on a contract basis, on a loan and partial cash basis, any part of 586 million bushels of grain, an opportunity which was picked up by the United States and the grain provided by the United States. I am in favour of selling to communist China; I have made that clear, but I do not think we have to lean over backward in a one-sided deal. We shall keep it in storage. We shall keep it available. The farmers will have the cost of storing it on the farms; the national treasury will have the cost of storing another part of it under the storage program. China may or may not buy, but we shall keep it available.
This is the most one-sided agreement I have ever seen. I have been making inquiries, and I am confident that China has not agreed in a firm manner to buy a single bushel of
Supply-Trade and Commerce wheat beyond the 28 million bushels to be delivered between June 1 and November 30. We have agreed that if China wants the wheat we shall have it. We may have it, all right.


Mr. Muir (Lisgar):: I should like to ask the hon. member whether he is against this deal that we have completed with China.


Hazen Robert Argue: I have made my position clear. I am against this thing being blown up as a firm agreement when it is no such thing. I am against false publicity, and I am against the farmers of western Canada being shown what could turn out to be a hoax unless the Minister of Trade and Commerce-and he is the minister who can do it-assures us that communist China will buy this quantity of grain and that Canada is prepared to sell it no matter what price communist China may offer and will pay. I am suggesting that this is just another of those areas where this government is operating by hiring public relations people to put something in the best possible light from the standpoint of the government, but not necessarily very close to the hard facts and the substance of what is involved.
Let us be perfectly clear about this. This is no firm transaction for the sale of 186 million bushels of wheat. This is just what it is not. This is a firm transaction for 28 million bushels of wheat. Beyond that China commits herself to nothing. The Canadian government says it has a storage plan under which we shall have the balance of 158 million bushels available if China should decide to buy it on the basis of future contracts, when both price and quantity will be under negotiation.


Mr. Johnson:: Now that the hon. member for Assiniboia has completed his comments I believe the committee will not mind if I take this opportunity, the first I have, to congratulate the new Minister of Trade and Commerce.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, I have always admired the former minister of transport. I hope you will not mind if I take this opportunity to congratulate him although the minister is a veteran of the cabinet on his appointment as Minister of Trade and Commerce.
In the last few months, it has been repeatedly said that the province of Quebec is on the go. If the province of Quebec is on the go and if the rest of the country is on the go, the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Hees) can claim part of the credit for it, because it is due to his efforts and his marvellous talent for organization.
Instead of indulging in pointless and groundless criticism of the type we have just

Supply-Trade and Commerce heard a lew moments ago from the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue), I shall just take a few seconds of the time of the house to place before the Minister of Trade and Commerce a suggestion which has repeatedly been made to me by experts in commission sales.
It has been suggested to me repeatedly by experienced salesmen that I ask the government to try hiring people to sell on a commission basis on behalf of Canada in our trade commissioner service abroad. I think such a move would produce practical results, because there would be an incentive for such agents to sell more.
I know things are not done that way under the present system, but perhaps amendments might be made to the legal foundations of the department before hiring such salesmen to represent Canada abroad, whether they be paid on a commission basis by the companies doing the business, or by the government.
In any event, even if it required amendments to the Civil Service Act and to the government's hiring practices, I think it would yield practical results.
I therefore place this suggestion before the minister, and I leave it to the Department of Trade and Commerce to organize such a system and put it into operation. I do think the idea has merit and that it should gain acceptance or at least be thoroughly examined by the Department of Trade and Commerce.
(Text):


Mr. Macdonnell:: I have a few brief remarks which I intend to make at this time. It is a mere platitude to say how important trade is to our country, both externally and internally. We have been listening to comments on one important incident of trade. Another aspect we should not overlook is not merely material aspect but the extent to which it indicates that interdependence which, I suppose, is the best hope we have of peace. We ought to welcome it in every way and in every place we can find it.
I suppose when we look back to the nineteenth century it is clear that the peacefulness which, in the main, characterized that century was largely due to the influence of Britain and, most of all, to Britain's free trade policy, which one might say spanned the world and did so much to make people live happily together. Since then we have had a half century which in some ways seems almost like a mad period. We have encountered difficulties in the sphere of trade and elsewhere which call for new qualities, qualities which perhaps we have never had to show before except in time of war.

I should like to read a sentence or two from that great public servant, as I regard him, Adlai Stevenson, who seems not only to think clearly about these matters but to have a wonderful gift for expressing himself:
What lies ahead of us in this bewildering century is invisible but it may be even more significant. In the past the north Atlantic nations dominated the world. But they could not control themselves, and after their great world wars the power and influence of Europe declined; Russia and the United States suddenly emerged as the two dominant powers. Already the brief day of two power domination is passing and new centres of power are rising from old ashes in Asia.
Let me repeat these important words:
-new centres of power are rising from old ashes in Asia.
This is something we should all be taking most seriously. He goes on to say:
By the end of the century China and India will be industrialized, and China's population will be close to a billion.
Then he says:
To guide us through these uncharted seas, to comprehend and direct prodigious forces now shaping the new world, is going to make heavy demands on our resources of wisdom, leadership, self-discipline and magnanimity.
Let me call your attention again to these words:
-wisdom, leadership, self-discipline and magnanimity.
Let me now come closer home and use words which should come directly to the mind of each of us, because they come from a man of ability in private industry who has been drafted into public service in an important capacity. I refer to Mr. George de Young, chairman of the productivity council. He used words which I found a bit startling but which no one should disregard. He said:
Passive confidence-
Note the word "passive".
Passive confidence in our now disproved technological and economical superiority, and continued factional and segmental rivalry have resulted in Canada's economy no longer being able to provide work for all its own people through private enterprise.
Mr. de Young has been on a mission to the European economic community, and he has the following to say about that:
The mission concluded that government, business and labour in Canada must immediately adjust to this vital new economic area, check rising costs here, and achieve maximum utilization of resources, skills and manpower.
Our own Minister of Trade and Commerce has been speaking plainly to us about this. He used an illustration in regard to our own performance here which I found interesting, coming from him. He said we had gone soft, and compared us to a boxer who had gone soft. The Minister of Trade and Commerce

was once a boxer himself and I would rather he boxed with other individuals than me, because in his day he was a formidable individual at a strange place called Cambridge. The minister has talked plainly when he has spoken and has not pulled any punches in telling us what we need to do.
The same can be said of his deputy, who was speaking the other day in Montreal when he used words which I wish to read. He said this:
-problems and challenges in the economic and trade field, which stand in the doorway to our future. We must be concerned with these challenges today, for the future is tomorrow, and it is in the future that we, and our children, will be spending the rest of our lives.
Then he had this to say:
I am sure none of you are under any illusions about the difficulties and frustrations which face us. The economies of western Europe and Asia have been rebuilt.
I repeat the word "rebuilt". He went on to say:
We are confronted with bitter competition from many countries equally as hungry as we are, for a bigger share of world markets. Goods from the United Kingdom, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Japan, for example, are competing with our own in foreign markets and even in our own back yard. These goods, produced in new factories equipped with the most modern machinery and by highly skilled workers, whose wage rates are lower than those in Canada, are of excellent quality and design. In many cases they are lower in price.
The Department of Trade and Commerce has done much. I believe that the conference held here late last autumn accomplished a great deal, first of all in stimulating and encouraging our own trade commissioners and, second, by stimulating and directing the efforts of our exporters. The problem of unemployment is still serious, but there is no mystery about it; none whatever. We had a boom; some people say it began in 1935 and some say it began in 1940, but at any rate it lasted until after the middle of the 1950's. Then it flattened out a bit, but it has not turned into a depression. We are still doing well, as was reported in the Winnipeg Free Press some months ago. That article referred to a curious situation where we had substantial unemployment in the midst of prosperity.
This is a strange new phenomenon. I think the reasons for it are perfectly clear. At the time the boom flattened out a bit, competition from abroad increased enormously. Western European nations, as we know, were given a flying start, which really gave business a fresh start under the Marshall plan. The workmen there realized that their own hard work would produce benefit for themselves, and I think perhaps they have that sense more strongly than we in this country have.
Supply-Trade and Commerce At the same time other things happened, such as automation. Further, many individuals were leaving farms because one man on a farm could grow many times that which could be grown before. We had all these influences occurring at the same time.
I think everyone will agree that at the present time what we need more than anything else is increased world trade. I was very interested in speaking with an acute observer a few weeks ago who made an interesting remark about our own country, looking back over 60 years. He pointed out that in the early years of this century our economy was sparked by a railway boom. After that we had the motor car industry boom, which this man described as being now in what he called a state of high level stagnation. He next pointed out that we then had the chemical industry boom, followed by an electronic industry boom and, one might add, the boom resulting from two wars. This man went on to say that he thought the next economic impulse in our country must come from raising economic conditions in underdeveloped countries.
This is the subject I want to speak about now. I have done so before, and as long as Mr. Speaker will allow me and while there is breath in me I will continue to do so, because I believe this is the most important thing which faces us now. I think we are not alive to it. I do not flatter myself that my words are going to change the minds of the people, but I should hope that the press would take more interest in it. A few of the better newspapers have done so already, but I think this subject should appear in every newspaper. However, this is just my own opinion.
I would like to refer now to the experience we had 15 years ago, in 1946, when we made a loan of $1,250 million to Great Britain. I would like to refer to what was said at that time by the then minister in his speech introducing this subject. He said that this loan would be just as much in our own interests as in the interests of the people to whom it was being made. As a matter of fact, that advance to the people of Britain in 1946 was followed by the purchase of hundreds of millions of dollars of our exports and was of great assistance to us in those years after the war.
I would like to make a point now that I have made here before, because it seems to me to illustrate the trade advantage derived from this kind of thing. That is, trade is aid, or aid is trade, whichever way you like to put it. Some years ago when we made a gift -I am not talking about gifts now but about loans-under the Colombo plan of some $35

Supply-Trade and Commerce million, 95 per cent was in the form of manufactured goods, which represented Canadian employment. We did not ship barrels of dollars over to India.
We now have a new impulse from President Kennedy. His views may not rank quite as high today as they did a month ago, but after all, any man can make a mistake and recover from it. Anyone who has read his statement to congress will agree that it was a great document indeed and showed a constructive attitude. One of the great things he did was to point out that if aid to those countries is going to be effective it must be done not year by year but based on several years-he suggested five-so it can be used in a planned way.
Then I come to that great paper we all respect, the London Economist. It is a very conservative paper, and I mean conservative with a small "c". I think it is full of realism and experience. I was very interested in what it had to say about assistance. It made one or two very practical suggestions. It referred to the meeting of the development assistance group which took place in London about a month ago. This is what it said:
What the Americans would like each of their allies to do is to commit itself to give definite amounts of assistance, and to co-ordinate individual national programs in some international new deal designed to capture the imagination of the world.
That, of course, is what is necessary. Next, the Economist speaks of the dramatic effect which would be caused if a lead were given in Europe. Then it adds this:
Now, in short, is the historic opportunity for Mr. Macmillan to make a speech that could launch a whole new conception of international economic relations, and for people here to start thinking about the best form that a world aid scheme could take.
I have no time to deal with the details of what the Economist said, but I want to draw attention to one thing which I think is very practical. What they have in mind is a loan for five years at a time. They point out that the contributions would not have to be made from tax appropriations immediately. They say:
The strain that these contributions would impose would then fall upon the contributing countries only as they were used-mainly-
And note this:
-mainly in order to buy their capital equipment or the services of some of their technicians.
In other words the loan would be spent at home. Then the Economist remarks shrewdly enough:
This "strain" would thus show itself at first in the form of a recorded increase in the donor country's export surplus, which is not the sort of strain that usually causes great difficulties.


They are saying the same thing that I said a moment ago about our Colombo plan contribution, namely that it represented Canadian employment. The Economist also suggests that the international monetary fund could assist in the problem of foreign exchange which will arise. I hope to go into that matter again later this session, indeed to bring it up again when I have the chance, but I quote the Economist as a witness of proven experience, of common sense and realism. Its comments should indicate that this is not pie in the sky but is common sense and good business.
I have already referred the committee to our own experience in 1946 when the minister of finance, in speaking on this billion and a quarter dollar credit, said:
The need for a credit of this magnitude and on these terms springs not only from the effects of the war upon Britain, but also from the vital importance to Canada of the re-establishment, expansion and continued development of foreign trade.
That is what we did in 1946. It succeeded then and there is no reason why it cannot succeed today.
I am not going to take up too much of the time of the committee, but I do want to refer to the great world figures who have studied this matter, who are giving their lives to it and whose opinions I believe are more valuable than any other opinions we can get. I refer to Hoffman, Black and Adlai Stevenson. I prescribe for hon. members a course of reading of some of the things they have written. Until we have read what they have to say I suggest we are not in any position to make up our minds. I have a pamphlet by Adlai Stevenson which I think is one of the most important bits of reading I have done. I am going to see whether I can get our mechanical staff to make some copies, and if I can I am going to take the liberty of putting them in the post office boxes of hon. members.
Again, without giving figures, I want to remind the committee of what I said before. Paul Hoffman gives astronomical figures as to what will be done in the way of foreign trade if we raise the buying power of the underdeveloped countries, those hundreds of millions of people who go to bed hungry every night. Do not let us forget that if we raised their purchasing power, that is the per capita income, by even a dollar a year over the next 10 years the results would be astronomical.
I should like to refer to another matter with which I was greatly struck in reading the Prime Minister's speech at the United Nations last September, a speech which caused such world-wide interest. At that

time he had a good deal to say about the new states coming into existence. He said:
Since the war 14 colonies and territories comprising half a billion people have achieved complete freedom within the commonwealth.
I learned also that France had also given independence to 14 colonies. But this political independence is going to be a barren and negative thing unless economic independence goes with it. We have this whole flock of new countries which are now aware of their miserable conditions. I noticed the other day that a far eastern statesman was in the United States. He was talking to the big producers of radio and television in Hollywood. He accused them of being revolutionaries, because he said that for the first time these producers in Hollywood had made clear to the people of the underdeveloped countries the terrible plight they were in, although it is hard to believe it is true that they had not realized it before.
I think it is fair to consider the urgent need from the point of view of the underdeveloped countries in the commonwealth. I talked about India before. I shall not take the time of the committee now, but I do want to say this. Serious, competent people who have come back from India after months of study have said that she is entitled to assistance on economic grounds. Some of them are bankers. Three, including Sir Oliver Franks, head of one of the big British banks, representing leading world banks, came back from India and said she was entitled to assistance. Others have done so as well, including those 1 have mentioned.
I am not going to take more time. I make no apologies for bringing this up again. I believe it is something that we should all be interested in. I believe it to be in our own interest, just as it proved to be in 1946. Plans made then paid off abundantly. For that reason I put it in this way. I am not able to believe, and I do not find men whose opinions I value most saying, that there are any clear indications that we shall be able to deal with the problem of unemployment unless by a substantial increase in the mass of world trade. I find scarcely anyone who disagrees with this. Also, what I read from the deputy minister makes it very clear that the difficult competition we face from the western European nations makes our problem that much greater. The minister made this clear also. The western European nations have come back in a big way with what I call a flying start. Of course people are entitled to reach their own conclusions, but the stock market at the present time seems to believe that things are on the uptrend; it has a hunch that everything is going to be all right. People are busy climbing on the
Supply-Trade and Commerce bandwagon. This seems to me to indicate there is every reason to believe that it is in our own interest-I do not think the minister will disagree with this for a minute; indeed, I am sure he has said it-to insist on an increase in world trade.
I pause on the moral argument. If we had those miserable people living within our sight we could not stand it, of course. Being compassionate people we would act on that basis. I am not going to deal with that today, or with the political side.
Of course from the political side we should be deeply concerned. We should be deeply concerned about helping these people so that they can work out their economic salvation by the institutions of freedom and not by the institutions of totalitarianism.
One only needs to pause a moment to realize how much that means to us. I have quoted before in the house from the book by Chester Bowles, one-time ambassador to India, his reference to a conversation he had with an Indian statesman who said to him, "You people, whether or not you like it, are in competition with the communists. First of all, you are in competition because we are going to ask whether you are making more rapid economic progress than they are. Second, you are in competition because we are going to compare the help we get from them with the help we get from you." We cannot overlook that for one moment. The same man said to Bowles, "Of course, if India goes the whole of southeast Asia goes".
I leave this with the house and I ask hon. members to consider it. I shall try to place the speech by Stevenson in hon. members' hands, and I would beg hon. members to read it. I do not believe anyone who reads it will fail to be impressed with the urgency and the importance of reaching the right decision on this question.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I have been very much moved by the remarks we have just listened to by the hon. member for Greenwood in what was a truly Liberal speech. I would remind the hon. gentleman that in times past he has talked about strengthening the opposition in the house, and I assure him that if he feels he can contribute to the strengthening of the opposition there is always a light in the window for him on this side of the house.
Indeed, it might be a very useful thing for the hon. member to be associated with those who originated the policies he commended so highly today. I thank him for his commendation of the courageous things that were done by Mr. Mackenzie King, Mr. Ilsley and Mr. St. Laurent in 1946, because it did take courage at that time. The loan to Britain and

Supply-Trade and Commerce the other loans that were made at that time were not made with the unanimous approval of everyone in the country. It was a policy that required courage and fortitude, a policy that was attacked in certain parts of this country, particularly, I regret to have to recall, by the friends of the hon. gentleman in one part of the country under the slogan, "Les Liberaux donnent aux etrangers, Duples-sis donne a sa province".
Notwithstanding that kind of appeal, the majority of the Canadian people in every province approved this policy. We have been able to build on it and I think Canada, under whichever government has been in office, has no reason to apologize for what has been done in this field of aid for underdeveloped countries. I think we have given a lead both in measures for the restoration of trade and in the inauguration and building up of the Colombo plan; and, because of the high respect in which the hon. gentleman is held not merely in this house but in many parts of the country, I sincerely trust his remarks will fall on listening ears and not on deaf ears.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: If I may have one moment, Mr. Chairman, I wish, of course, to repudiate the suggestion of the hon. gentleman that whenever one says anything that he considers sensible it is a Liberal remark. However, I was reassured when he said before he sat down that both parties had reason to take satisfaction from their attitude in this matter, and I think that is true. I have never been at pains to deny the Liberal party whatever credit is due them, but I am certainly at pains to point out that the party to which I belong has shown itself broad, tolerant and constructive in these matters for many years.


George Harris Hees: I should like to thank the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville and the hon. member for Greenwood for the very constructive remarks they have made this morning. I should also like to comment briefly on the remarks of the hon. member for Assiniboia. In doing so I should like to quote a paragraph from the statement of the Minister of Agriculture when he spoke in the house a day or two ago about the wheat agreement with China. As found on page 4205 of Hansard he said:
I have made it clear that there is a long term agreement. Under that agreement one contract has been signed. Each future contract will be negotiated in respect to price and quantity.
In speaking this morning the hon. member for Assiniboia, it seemed to me, tried to make out that the Minister of Agriculture had in some way misled the house as to what amount was in this agreement. I think it is evident

from my quotation of the minister's words that he made it very clear exactly what this agreement is. On behalf of the government may I say that we believe this agreement is a good agreement, one which will benefit greatly our wheat and grain farmers and the Canadian economy as a whole. From the words of the hon. member for Assiniboia it is quite clear that if he and his party were the government of Canada today they would not have signed this agreement, with its great benefits to the farmers of Canada and to the Canadian economy as a whole.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, I am exceedingly disappointed by the statement of the minister, because it confirms in a very real way all the suspicions I have had about the agreement. No one has complained about the government signing an agreement. I am not even complaining about the signing of this agreement, although I have not seen it and think it should be produced. I am complaining, however, about the very misleading terms in which the minister referred to this agreement.
This is the history of sales to China this year. On February 2 there was an announcement by the government of the sale of 40 million bushels of wheat and barley valued at $60 million. On May 2 the minister announced in the house that in addition to this earlier sale there had been a sale of 2.2 million bushels of wheat valued at $3.7 million. The next sale the government announced was the sale of 28 million bushels of wheat and 17 million bushels of barley with an estimated total value of $66 million. Under the long term agreement the terms of payment are 25 per cent cash and the balance in 270 days.
But in order to get this additional agreement for the period June 1 to November 30 -and the minister can correct me if he believes I am wrong-Canada has had to do a great many things. The government has agreed to provide, and parliament will have to provide, a $50 million credit in order that this transaction may be undertaken. So that what the minister should have announced when he came back was not a gigantic sale of $362 million worth of grain, which has not taken place and for which an agreement has not been signed, although he talked about a sale, but rather a second agreement for a certain quantity of grain. At the same time he should have announced that in order to have this firm agreement signed for a much smaller sum, Canada has had to provide a credit of $50 million.
The Minister of Agriculture has talked about a sale of this order, namely 186.7 million bushels of wheat and 46.7 million bushels of barley worth approximately $362 million. He has told us the value and has

called it a sale, but there is no sale. If there is to be any sale in the future, the price and the quantity will be negotiated. The farmers of the prairies have been fooled into believing, and have been kidded, that this is a sale of 186.7 million bushels of wheat [DOT]-they have even got it to the decimal point -and 46.7 million bushels of barley, which is worth $362 million. The only people who have decided to make a firm commitment are the people of Canada. No firm commitment has been made by China.
My understanding is that when a sale is made it must be a contract entered into by two persons. They agree to specific things. In this case the two parties would be the wheat board and the China Resources Company. No such transaction has been agreed upon. There is no firm agreement beyond November 30 this year, and I put that to the minister. China has committed itself to absolutely nothing. Our Minister of Agriculture called it a sale of this order which was worth $362 million. He pointed out what this would do for the country. I ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce to deny what I have said. I know he cannot.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Will the hon. member permit a question?


Hazen Robert Argue: I suggest that beyond November 30 this year there is a guarantee of absolutely nothing on the part of China, and all Canada does is say that no matter what other customers might happen to be available, even if-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Hazen Robert Argue: When I am finished I will permit a question. No matter what other countries may want to purchase our wheat, we are committed to keeping in storage between now and the end of 1963 these quantities of wheat and barley, even though China has committed itself to absolutely nothing.
I say that the government and the minister, by the very careful phraseology of this statement, by using language in a way to mislead, by putting to work the high priced public relations people who have been hired not to sell wheat but to sell the Tory party, have perpetrated what may yet be the greatest hoax that the grain industry has seen for a long time. As I say, China has committed itself to nothing beyond November 30.
The government has allowed the story to go across Canada. Here we have the Winnipeg Free Press with a headline, "Red China Buying Canadian Grain for $362 Million". There is no such agreement, and I challenge the government to produce the agreement, make it a public document and let us not continue
4.	1961
Supply-Trade and Commerce the argument in committee. Le1 the people know what is in the agreement. Let us see who is correct in his analysis of what this agreement means.


Mr. Mcllrailh:: Mr. Chairman-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I believe the hon, member said he would permit a question.


Hazen Robert Argue: Yes.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: The hon. member has referred to the fact that the Canadian government has committed itself to keep this grain in storage. There are two questions I should like to ask. First, does the hon. member believe this grain will be in storage?


Hazen Robert Argue: I am afraid with the Tory party in power it will be. I hope it will not.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: The second question is, is this not a major breakthrough in accepting sterling for our grain, something the farmers have been requesting for a number of years?


Hazen Robert Argue: Well, I took it that the sterling would be convertible. My hon. friend can tell me if they have taken sterling which really cannot be converted into dollars and, therefore, is blocked sterling. Perhaps the hon. member can tell me if this government has decided to take blocked sterling only from communist China. I assumed that the sterling that was taken was convertible and that it was, in fact, a cash sale. There is a breakthrough-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: That is a big admission for you.


Hazen Robert Argue: -in the quantities that have been sold.


Mr. Chambers:: You do not want the sale cancelled?


Hazen Robert Argue: I just want the truth. Let us put all the facts on the record. The fact of the matter is that this is just a pipe dream. This is just a hoax. This is just part of the vision. This is just another Tory promise that exists for the public relations people, but does not really exist.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: You see your dream of taking over the leadership of the New party failing and falling.


George James McIlraith: This subject of the wheat agreement certainly has generated a great deal of heat. Undoubtedly the agreement is of major importance. I must say that the allegations made by the leader of the group on my right, the C.C.F. group, are of a very serious nature. If they are sustained when

Supply-Trade and Commerce the agreement is produced, they will certainly represent a matter of major importance to the country.
I listened with great interest to the announcement of the Minister of Agriculture in common with all other hon. members in the house. I attached great importance to it and subsequently I read the statement very carefully. When I read it carefully there were some questions about it that concerned me. I did not want to put the questions to the Minister of Trade and Commerce yesterday because, as I mentioned in my remarks, he has a truncated department. When I made that reference I had in mind the fact that the wheat board had been taken from his jurisdiction and given to the Minister of Agriculture, rightly or wrongly. I thought the questions that arose in my mind about this contract were ones that should properly concern the other department. I had some questions, however, concerning the form of payment as they related to trade generally. The agreement itself, as announced, did raise questions in my mind, so I took what I thought was the proper course and put a motion on the order paper requesting production of the document.
This is something that cannot be debated in the committee at this stage. I would expect that the document would be produced, and we could then see whether or not the things that have been said about the agreement are right. They may or may not be. I simply do not know. I felt that the course adopted ought to be explained to the committee in case hon. members should assume from the failure to deal with it in my remarks yesterday that we somehow thought the agreement was not of major importance to the economy of this country, or of any significance to agriculture. It was simply a matter of taking the view that the agreement itself was something that came under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Agriculture.
I should have liked to ask this Minister of Trade and Commerce some questions about it, and indeed raise some arguments with him about it, but I thought it improper to do so. I should like the minister's view on what the situation is with respect to jurisdiction over this subject of the sale of wheat, now that jurisdiction over the wheat board and the board of grain commissioners has been taken from the Minister of Trade and Commerce and given to the Minister of Agriculture.


George Harris Hees: It is very easy to answer that question, Mr. Chairman. The wheat board and the board of grain commissioners now come under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Agriculture. He is responsible for the operation of these bodies. In the selling of

wheat and grain abroad, my department gives every possible assistance to the board of grain commissioners and the wheat board, as well as to the minister himself. We will continue to do that.


George James McIlraith: Is it quite clear that the actual agreements are negotiated by other departments and not by your department?


George Harris Hees: That is correct, Mr. Chairman.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Chairman, I wish to ask a question of the hon. member for Assini-boia, who has been making statements about misleading the house and these mythical public relations officers who have misled the public. As I understand it, the criticisms made by the hon. member for Assiniboia are derived from his having read the statement made by the minister to the House of Commons. As I listened to the minister the other day it seemed perfectly clear to me. It was perfectly clear that there was no misleading of the house in that statement. The minister did not pretend that the whole of the $362 million sale was in the same class. I think it was perfectly clear, and anyone who read the whole statement could understand it. That was my feeling when I listened to the statement.
If I am wrong, I want to be corrected, but I understood the hon. member's criticism was of statements which appeared in the press, and that when he saw the actual Hansard record he realized that those statements were a little too enthusiastic. Sometimes newspapers do become enthusiastic, but the idea that the minister should be blamed or was in any way responsible for misleading the public is, I think, something which is utterly unfair and which I hope the hon. member will withdraw.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, as we go along some things are at least becoming clearer to me, and the statement the hon. member for Greenwood has just made is exceedingly important. While he objects to the kind of language I may have used this morning- this is his perfect right, and I respect his opinion-he does not quarrel with the substance of what I said. He is not quarrelling with my interpretation of the agreement itself.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am quarrelling not with your interpretation of the agreement but with your suggestion that the minister was in some way responsible for what appeared in the press. That is going very far in itself, but also in addition the member for Assiniboia said the minister made the statement in such a way as to not really give a disclosure. My

point is that it is clear the minister gave a full disclosure, because that is where the hon. member obtained the information on which he bases his argument.


Hazen Robert Argue: The important thing to me, as a member of parliament representing a part of Canada that has a tremendous interest in this matter, is that the hon. member agrees that my interpretation of the terms of the agreement is a correct one. He does object to my stating that the minister misled the house. He does not quarrel, apparently, with my statement that the press misled the country. I am really amazed that so many experienced members of the press gallery should buy this statement as they heard it, without really looking to see whether the Minister of Agriculture had something covered up a bit in the verbiage that he used. I say this statement was worded in a way that misled the house.


Egan Chambers: It was not.


Hazen Robert Argue: My friend can get up and talk-


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: It would be much more interesting than what you are saying now.


Hazen Robert Argue: -when I have resumed my seat. The Minister of Agriculture came in with this announcement and said this deal was worth approximately $362 million. That was the thing he was announcing. Then he added it to what had gone on before and said the approximate value was $425.6 million. The minister later on called it "a sale of this order". I think this was a carefully worded statement, and I think it was carefully designed to mislead. The minister did not come back and say, "We signed an agreement worth $60 million earlier. We have put a little bit on top of it".


Egan Chambers: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a question of privilege. The Minister of Agriculture is not present, and it is not within the rules of this house for an hon. member to say that another hon. member of this house deliberately designed something in order to mislead.


John Whitney Pickersgill: He did not say that.


Hazen Robert Argue: If the hon. member is right, if that is what I said, I apologize. I did not mean to put in the word "deliberately". But if the minister had meant it to be deliberate he could not have done a better job. I will say I think this statement misled the house.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: No.


Mr. Lambert:: You were not here; you were out politicking.


Hazen Robert Argue: I should say it was put in a misleading manner. It certainly misled the
Supply-Trade and Commerce country. It misled no less a person than the president of the Saskatchewan wheat pool. He said "This is a wonderful deal. It will take the surplus off the farms".


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Sour grapes.


Hazen Robert Argue: It is not going to take the surplus off the farms. This is just another fleabite, and a welcome one; and I hope we have some more of this order. But 28 million bushels of wheat, when related to the hundreds and hundreds of millions of bushels which are surplus, are not going to take the surplus off the farms. The way the announcement has been interpreted, there is a lot more in it for the future. I do not know why the government signed this agreement as it is drawn, and I should like an explanation-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: In other words you think they should not have signed it?


Hazen Robert Argue: I think this government signed an agreement to keep in storage and to provide, to have available, this huge quantity of grain, and that communist China did not make any commitment in exchange as to quantity or price. The Canadian government, through the Canadian wheat board, has committed itself to sell, but China has committed itself, I submit, to absolutely nothing beyond November of this year.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, could I correct the hon. member. I am advised that the government of China have agreed to take the full quantity, and that the only thing which remains to be negotiated is the price and delivery of the quantities from time to time. But they have agreed to take the full quantity over the period of time mentioned.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, I think the only way the minister can put forward this statement is to produce the agreement. I challenge that interpretation of the agreement. We have been on this subject for one hour-


An hon. Member:: Longer than that.


Hazen Robert Argue: -and the minister has now said there is a firm commitment from China.


Mr. Chown:: He is not the responsible minister.


Hazen Robert Argue: He is the responsible minister; he is a member of the cabinet. I used to hear about cabinet solidarity and that you cannot have ministers talking in different directions at different times. Now the hon. member says "Don't hold this minister responsible. He is not responsible; he did not negotiate the agreement".


Gordon Campbell Chown: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I simply said that the Minister of Trade

Supply-Trade and Commerce and Commerce is not responsible for producing the agreement the hon. member seeks. That is the only point I made, and I do not want the record to be covered with a cloud of the hon. member's verbiage because he takes it upon himself to misinterpret what I said.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, perhaps I could just read again the statement the Minister of Agriculture made in the house when making this announcement. He said:
I have made it clear that there is a long term agreement. Under that agreement one contract has been signed. Each iuture contract will be negotiated in respect to price and quantity.
The operations of the wheat board do not come under my department, but trade generally does. I have been willing to discuss this matter in that context, but we are getting down to specifics which have to do with something that comes under the jurisdiction of my colleague the Minister of Agriculture. I suggest that we pass on to another subject. I think this matter has been thoroughly discussed as far as I am able to discuss it. I suggest we now pass on to other matters of trade and commerce. As soon as the Minister of Agriculture comes back, I suggest that the hon. member for Assiniboia puts his questions to him. I feel sure my colleague will be very glad to answer the hon. member.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, we are really getting the runaround. The minister now says there is an agreement. Nobody has been denying that there is an agreement, or that there is some document which has been signed. I should like to see the agreement. Certainly there is an agreement, but it is the most lopsided agreement I have ever heard of, where Canada agrees to provide and keep available this quantity of grain and, as far as I can tell, China has committed herself to nothing. To support his contention that there is some commitment the minister reads from his colleague's statement the words:
I have made It clear that there is a long term agreement.
Of course there is, but it does not necessarily mean a thing. China does not commit herself to take a quantity of grain. She does not commit herself to the price that will be paid. Everything will be under negotiation except the Canadian part, which provides that we shall keep the grain available. Countries such as India have wanted our grain in the past and have gone into the markets of the world to obtain 586 million bushels of wheat in a four year period. We should have been engaged, long before, in the sale of our grain in the distressed areas of the world. However, the agreements we make

should be agreements which provide for the sale of certain quantities of grain under guaranteed arrangements, and when agreements are signed they should mean something. I suggest that this agreement in its present terms does not say anything at all in support of the impressions which the minister sought to convey.


George James McIlraith: Before the vote carries I wish to raise another matter in connection with the administration of the department, having to do with the advice available to the minister from economists and related officials of the department.
It will be recalled that in January of 1958 a well known episode took place in the House of Commons, when the present Prime Minister made reference to a document called "The Canadian Economic Outlook, 1957". There was considerable controversy at the time with regard to this. It was a document marked "secret" on some pages and "confidential" on others, a document from which most of the blue covers had been torn off. When it was tabled a small part of them remained.
In any event, the document was an analysis prepared by economists in the department on a confidential basis for use by the government in helping them to formulate policy. Subsequent examination of the document showed that the Prime Minister in referring to it in the course of his speech had taken excerpts from it which were completely out of context. Study of the document after it had been tabled also showed that it was a comprehensive one, a document of a type which would be very helpful to the government in formulating policy by way of legislation or otherwise.
The next year, after a lot of delay and a lot of argument in the house, "The Canadian Economic Outlook, 1958" was tabled. A great deal of argument took place about it, but finally it was tabled and it appeared to be a document of the same general nature as previously. Then in 1960 when a motion was put forward asking for the tabling of "The Canadian Economic Outlook, 1959", the document was not produced; in fact there was a refusal to produce it. The motion was voted on by the house and the government succeeded in voting down the request for the production of that document without giving any reason at all for this action, though the government itself had set the precedent for the tabling of the document.
Later, when we raised the matter on the estimates of the department last year, after a great deal of somewhat heated argument the minister of trade and commerce of that day, now the Minister of Veterans Affairs, took the position that there was no such

document as "The Canadian Economic Outlook, 1959". Be that as it may, there appeared to be a contradiction at that time between the position taken when the production of the document was sought and the statement made when the matter was raised again on the estimates, when the minister said no such document had been prepared.
The question I wish to ask the present minister is this. Does he have such a document prepared for the use of the government? That is the narrow question I want to ask.


George Harris Hees: As the hon. member has said, two years ago, in accordance with what my predecessor stated when speaking on the estimates of this department-


George James McIlraith: It was just a year ago.


George Harris Hees: -last year the department adopted the procedure of preparing regular reports for the guidance of the minister and the government. This procedure is currently being followed.


George James McIlraith: That does not deal sufficiently with the question I sought to raise. Last year the matter was debated at some length on the estimates, as will appear from the report in Hansard of August 6, 1960 at pages 7724 and following. Summing up the whole argument-and I think I can do it fairly-it is clear the position taken by the minister was that the comprehensive document, the economic analysis for the year, the outlook for the year, was no longer provided, though he indicated that other related information was available from economists in the department.
I think that is an accurate summary of the position taken by the minister. What I want to ask the present minister is this. Is there one comprehensive report similar to the former "Canadian Economic Outlook" for particular years now provided for the use of the government?


George Harris Hees: No, Mr. Chairman.


George James McIlraith: Then, since we have a new minister of trade and commerce and since, except for the fact that he was a minister at that time, he was not directly involved in what I think must be regarded by most people as a most unusual procedure in relation to this document and to this whole affair, and since the hon. gentleman would not be subject to embarrassment if he were to reverse the decision which has been taken and were to put the production of this document back on a proper basis, I should like to urge him to re-establish the section of his department which did that work and to strengthen the present economic research section of his department in order that it may once again
4,	1961
Supply-Trade and Commerce take up this task on a proper basis. It seems to me that the hon. gentleman and, indeed, the whole government are materially handicapping themselves by cutting themselves off from this kind of assistance, and that they have undoubtedly cut themselves off to some extent at least from this type of expert advice which it is very necessary for any government to have.


George Harris Hees: I am glad to be able to assure the hon. member that the expert advice is still available and is still given. However, it is given at more regular intervals now and much more frequently than in the past. The government is receiving the same kind of information from our economists as we did before, but now I get it several times a year instead of once a year.


George James McIlraith: The former information was not given only once a year. If the minister would look at those former reports he would find there were regular supplements, monthly supplements and that sort of thing. I urge the minister not to let the matter go in this way. The section of his department concerned could stand additional support from the ministry, proper support for the handling of the type of information it must prepare if it is to do its work successfully. The government would do well with more of that kind of advice.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask the minister a supplementary question along the lines of those asked by the hon. member for Ottawa West. I should think the members of this committee would be interested, as I know I am, if the minister told us how frequently he receives these reports, and when the change in procedure was made.


George Harris Hees: I have been receiving these reports, ever since I became minister, I would say every month or six weeks.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Does the minister know whether he receives them each month or six weeks; whether he receives them at regular or irregular intervals?


George Harris Hees: I receive them at irregular intervals, Mr. Chairman.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could the minister answer my other question regarding when the system was changed?


George Harris Hees: It was changed two years ago, Mr. Chairman.


John Whitney Pickersgill: What was the nature of the change?


George Harris Hees: The change was that the reports were given to the minister at much more regular intervals than formerly.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could the minister say whether the custom that was followed by the previous administration of circulating these reports to every minister is being carried on, or has that been stopped?


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman these reports are circulated to any minister that I consider would be particularly interested in the matters discussed therein.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I take it there is no regular system of distribution as there formerly was?


George Harris Hees: That is right, Mr. Chairman.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, in other words the minister is now keeping most of his colleagues in the dark most of the time.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, my colleagues are not in the dark at any time. I do not believe, as the other government perhaps did, that one should put a lot of papers on the desks of individuals at regular intervals.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I take it the minister is perhaps afraid that there might be something hidden which, after the next election, will be dusted off by someone else in the fashion we all recall so well.


Norman Platt Lambert: Just guilty individuals do things like that.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, the minister is taking the precaution of hiding the information so completely that no one will possibly find it. I would like to ask the minister whether these reports are sent regularly to the secretary of the cabinet.


George Harris Hees: No, Mr. Chairman, they are not.


Mr. McMillan:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister one or two questions. I do not intend to hold up these estimates, but I would like to know whether, in connection with application of quotas on imports and measures taken under the anti-dumping act, there is close co-operation between the minister and his colleague the Minister of National Revenue. I ask that question because it seems to me that the minister's department would be the only department conversant with Canadian production and, therefore, able to give that information to the Minister of National Revenue.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, my department, the Department of National Revenue and the Department of Finance work very closely together on matters of this kind at all times.


William Hector McMillan: Mr. Chairman, in connection with this matter, in the last issue of the Leather and Shoes magazine I noticed a statement to the effect that the Japanese ministry of international trade has asked the

Japanese exporters of baseball gloves to set voluntary quotas on their shipments to the United States. This has been done at the request of the government of the United States. Has similar action been taken in Canada, and have leather manufacturers asked for that type of action? I know that leather goods manufacturers feel that the production of similar goods is subsidized by foreign governments. I would also like to know what action the minister has recommended to the Minister of National Revenue regarding a similar situation in respect of silverware and other commodities which he might now have in mind.


George Harris Hees: I am not aware of any such request regarding baseball gloves. Such requests would be made directly to the Minister of Finance. I am unaware of any having been made, although there may have been.


Jacques Flynn: Shall vote 394 carry?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, Mr. Chairman. I should like to ask the minister a question, and if his answer indicates that my opinion is correct I will have some observations to make. The minister is probably aware that in late 1953 or 1954-I am not sure precisely when it was-the prime responsibility for the sale of fish was transferred from the Department of Fisheries to the minister's department. Is that still the situation?


George Harris Hees: Yes, it is, Mr. Chairman.


John Whitney Pickersgill: In that case, Mr. Chairman, I have some observations to make regarding this very important subject. The minister will recall that he received a delegation of gentlemen, whom he variously described as the finest businessmen he had ever known, good traders, and so on, from Cuba, one of our principal customers for salt fish. The minister is probably aware, notwithstanding his enthusiasm for this delegation, that the market for salt fish in Cuba is not exactly buoyant at the present time. The minister is perhaps also aware that we have been facing increasing competition in many of our traditional markets which were mainly supplied by Canadian fish. I am sure he is thoroughly familiar with the difficulties there have been during recent years with respect to the exchange problem in Brazil. The result is that in the past year, particularly, there has been a growing accumulation of salt fish for which apparently there is no immediate market.
This problem has caused very grave concern to the producers and merchants on the east coast. I feel that before the minister's estimates are completed-I would not necessarily insist upon his doing so on the first

item of his estimates, if he feels there is some other more suitable estimate-he should make a statement regarding both the situation in respect of stocks and measures now being taken to deal with the problem. If the minister considers, as many other individuals do, that there is an emergency regarding this matter, what emergency action does the government plan to take?
I see it is one o'clock, and as I have a few other brief observations to make in respect of this subject, perhaps I could now call it one o'clock.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I rose rather unexpectedly just before one o'clock; I had not realized that we seemed to be so near the conclusion of debate on the minister's first item, perhaps because I was unfortunately not able to be here yesterday. Instead of putting the position in my own words I think, if the committee will bear with me for a moment, I will put it in the words of Mr. Harold Shea as they appeared in the Halifax Chronicle-Herald, of March 16, 1961. Mr. Shea had obviously done a good deal of hard work on this problem. I think he has set out the position in a more succinct way than I could do it just by speaking off the cuff which, as hon. members know, I sometimes do. The article is headed:
And now a salt fish crisis for Maritimes.
With a growing cod surplus at home and a mounting dollar shortage in traditional markets, exporters have called upon Ottawa for assistance through give-aways to Congo or long term credits for foreign countries.
The dispatch itself reads:
Problems of currency and competition are creating severe marketing difficulties for salt fish exporters in the Atlantic provinces and, unless the above average stockpile can be sold soon, lower returns to fishermen may be expected this year.
This situation is causing concern to the federal government, too.
I hope Mr. Shea was right in this. I continue:
It has been asked to help, but officials candidly admit that there does not appear to be any easy solution.
Well, I do not think there is an easy solution. That is why we have governments. If all our problems could be solved easily I imagine we would dispense with government altogether, especially in the economic field. The dispatch goes on:
At a time when exporters on the east coast would normally be clearing away the last stocks of
Supply-Trade and Commerce salted cod and shipping them off to the traditional markets in the Caribbean, there is a heavy holdover of this fish with little hope of volume sales.
And with a new salt fishing season only weeks away-
Unfortunately it is not getting on very fast yet because of the ice, as the minister knows. If he does not, if he would consult the officials of his former department-transport-he would soon find out. I continue:
And with a new salt fishing season only weeks away, the stockpiles are going to grow and grow unless a way is found around marketing difficulties.
As of January 31, according to government figures, the salt fish exporters in the maritimes were carrying 443,000 cases of salted cod (100 pounds to the case). At the same time last year, the reserve supply was less than half that.
Sale prospects between now and the start of the new season are not bright. Orders are held for only 180,000 eases, which would leave the shippers with a backlog of 263,000 cases. What has caused this marketing problem?
I think it is worth putting these things on record because perhaps the minister can bring us more up to date than Mr. Shea has done about these particular markets.
Brazil, with a new government, hasn't yet decided how many dollars it will release for salt fish.
Spain, normally an importing country, is now selling fish to Puerto Rico and Portugal, two of Canada's customers.
Notwithstanding that statement, sir, I imagine that if we were producing the right kind of fish we could still sell fish to Spain, because I do not think the Spaniards can catch and cure the kind of fish they want for the high priced Spanish market. This is a problem on which I intend to say something when the estimates of the Department of Fisheries are in committee, but it would not be entirely fair to take up the time of the committee on the minister's estimates. The article goes on:
Cuba, suffering a dollar shortage because of the drastic cut in American tourist travel to the island, has run out of money. It has ceased buying fish from Canada and Norway, and proposes to offer, instead of money, such items as fruits, vegetables, tobacco, rum and sisal in exchange for fish.
Jamaica, Puerto Rico, British Guiana and the Dominican Republic are heavily overstocked with salted fish, and are not in the market immediately.
Dominican Republic is apparently short of dollars too, because there have been reports that accounts with maritime companies are several months in arrears.
With stocks 50 per cent heavier than last year, and with such dismal marketing prospects, and with a new fishing season scheduled to open soon, maritime exporters, and fishermen, are in trouble.
They have appealed to the government for assistance.
One suggestion offered by the exporters is that Ottawa purchase some of the backlog and contribute it to the people of the Congo. Norway is donating food now, and officials here say that no decision has been reached as to whether Canada will make food donations.
It might be resolved through provision of export credits to Cuba, for example. But while Cuba has long been the largest single salt cod importing

Supply-Trade and Commerce island in the Caribbean, there is little chance that it will be able to build up a dollar supply, and repay Canada, as long as it is involved in its hassle with the United States.
Should the federal government purchase the surplus, as it has done with certain agricultural products, and make it available to municipalities to help feed the needy and the poor?
Should it buy the surplus and give it away through the Colombo plan?
While the government and the industry ponders what to do, there remains the ironical fact that the Canadian people could solve this problem in a matter of a few days.
Then, Mr. Chairman, the writer goes on to point out that if every Canadian would eat one and one half pounds of this fish the whole problem would be solved. Well, as a matter of fact that is no doubt true, but I would not be honest, notwithstanding the high regard I have for my fellow citizens, if I thought that solution, even with all the salesmanship of the Minister of Trade and Commerce, if he would just give up all his other activities and start peddling salt fish from Esquimalt to St. John's could be arrived at. I doubt whether the minister would accomplish that in time to solve the problem. I suggest, however, that the minister do try to peddle a little of it in Esquimau, if he happens to be going there at this time of the year for any other reasons.
This is a very serious problem. For the people involved it is in every respect as serious as the problem of the wheat surplus was. Perhaps that has not been entirely solved yet, but at least there has been great improvement with regard to that situation.
I just happen to have here one of the many reports of speeches made by the minister's leader in 1957 when he was campaigning in the Atlantic provinces. This one is from the Globe and Mail of April 16, 1957. It is a report of a speech made by the present Prime Minister at St. John's, Newfoundland, in which the Prime Minister advocated a stronger support program for fish.
I think I am right in saying that from the time the right hon. gentleman who was minister of trade and commerce in the previous government took over the marketing of fish up to the present time, it has not been necessary to use the fisheries price support legislation for the support of salt codfish at all. During all that period I think the market has been able to absorb what was available and the prices have been reasonably good, not as good as we would like to see them by a long shot but reasonably good.
But this year there is a crisis and I think the fishermen and the fish trade in the Atlantic provinces will look to the Minister of Trade and Commerce to strengthen the arm of the Minister of Fisheries, and perhaps twist it if necessary, in order to see that they get
[Mr. Piekersgill.l

just as good treatment as the farmers get and that the fisheries price support legislation, which was put on the statute books at the same time as the agricultural price support legislation and for the same purpose, is used with the same zeal if it needs to be used.
Perhaps the government can think of some other way to meet the problem. Particularly in the light of what was said just before lunch by the hon. member for Greenwood, I must say there is a great deal to be said, when you think of the numbers of people in the world who go to bed hungry every night, for the government taking this surplus off the commercial market if it cannot be sold on the market and disposing of it in an area where it will not depress the markets for the year 1961. The sum involved in such an operation would not be tremendous. Then the minister could get to work with his trade commissioners and others to try to improve the whole market situation for 1961, but no one can improve the market situation for 1961 if there is the overhang there now is in the form of this surplus.
I point this out to the minister as something that is of the most serious consequence to an industry that is just as important to those engaged in it as any other industry in the country.


George Harris Hees: If I may answer the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, just before one o'clock he indicated that he would like some information on what the stocks are of wet salted cod and the various other types of cod.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, not just wet salted cod.


George Harris Hees: I asked the department to give me the figures, and I have them here. The figures of stocks on hand as of March 31 this year are as follows: Wet salted cod, 14,485,000 pounds; dried salted cod, 14,919,000 pounds, and boneless salt cod, 360,000 pounds. I asked for a report on our activities in assisting to get this fish sold, and am able to report as follows.
The question of helping our producers to move this cod is at present receiving the careful attention of officials of both the Department of Fisheries and the Department of Trade and Commerce. While stocks of salt cod as of March 31 are considerable in comparison wtih the corresponding period last year, it must be remembered that stocks in 1960 were inadequate. There are still three months remaining in the 1960-61 marketing year. It is expected that much of this surplus fish will move to markets other than Cuba prior to the end of June. In any event, we are watching the situation carefully and will do everything possible to assist in disposing of any stocks remaining at that time.

I again assure the hon. member and others interested in the fishing industry that our trade commissioners will work just as hard to help the producers of fish to sell their product, which is a very important one, as they will to help other producers to sell their products.
The hon. member asked if I would give him a comparison of sales in the last three years. I have asked for this information but have not received it yet. As soon as I receive it I will send it to the hon. member.


John Whitney Pickersgill: When the minister receives it will he ask to have it included in Hansard? I think it would be of great interest to everyone who is anxious to appreciate this problem properly and not to exaggerate it.


George Harris Hees: I will be very glad to do so.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps I might just add that I think those of us who are concerned about the plight of the fishing industry and the fishermen hope the minister will do more than watch the situation. I do not believe there is any possibility of the surplus that has now accumulated being absorbed by the the commercial markets this year without depressing the markets in a very serious way, and I think more than merely commercial operations will be required to deal with the emergency.


Mr. Matthews:: Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to take very much time in discussing this department, but I do think I should say a few words. Perhaps one of the most important departments that a government can have is the department of trade and commerce. This is not a new idea. It was a fact hundreds of years ago when the British empire started its great history in the field of commerce. History shows that, starting with British ships of commerce trading with all countries of the world, great strides were made in the building of the British empire.
It is quite interesting to know that the reign of Elizabeth I of England was a period of great significance in the advancement of the British nation. During her reign the nation made the greatest advances in the arts, the construction of many beautiful buildings, and also in trade and commerce. It is also interesting that Britain under Queen Elizabeth II is again making a wonderful recovery. Her economy is being built up by dedication and hard work, and we know that trade and commerce is one of the main contributing factors.
Our Minister of Trade and Commerce is, you can be sure, quite aware of these facts, and I know he has made a study of the factors that have contributed to the improved economy of Britain in the past few years. It
90205-6-274
Supply-Trade and Commerce is quite evident that Canada is now on the right path, and great credit is due to our Minister of Trade and Commerce. He is a real sales manager, has great faith in the people of Canada, and also knows that Canada has a great future if we Canadians will work to build this future.
A few years ago Canada was in the same position as a business, say a factory or a retail store, that had been left without proper management more or less to run itself. I have known businesses, and good ones too, that have not been properly operated; where the employees, while they were good workers and faithful, had been left by management without supervision and direction. The building and equipment had not been kept up to date, and the buying and selling of merchandise had not been done in a way suitable to the changed times. In other words the smart competitors had passed them and left them behind. Then a new management was installed to pull the business out of the rut, new approaches were used, good sales managers put new ideas and new faith into the workers, and after hard work by all a strong and healthy company was built.
When the voters of Canada changed the management of our fine country a few years ago they did so because they were sure that indifferent management was fast slowing down the economy of the nation. In spite of some people who have done their best to block the program of bringing Canada back to the position she should occupy as a nation with many natural resources, Canada has a bright and prosperous future.
Hon. members may not know that my constituency of Nanaimo contributes greatly to the commerce of the world. As many oceangoing freighters are loading their cargoes at the assembly wharf at Nanaimo, others are loading at Crofton. At the same time lumber freighters from all parts of the world are loading at Chemainus. This assembly wharf at Nanaimo is now being reconstructed. The reconstruction will take perhaps 14 months to complete at a cost of about three quarters of a million dollars.
On March 30 this year I wrote to the Minister of Agriculture requesting him to consider the construction of grain loading facilities at the assembly wharf while this reconstruction to which I have referred was taking place. I also spoke to the Minister of Trade and Commerce about this important matter. Grain storage facilities at this central port of Vancouver island could be a very important part of trade and commerce. While the federal government, in most cases, does not build these grain storage plants, I hope the Department of Agriculture will encourage the construction of such facilities.
4342	HOUSE OF
Supply-Trade and Commerce
I consider my constituency of Nanaimo to be a very important location which has contributed and will contribute greatly to the trade and commerce of Canada. Another important step in the improvement of deep-sea shipping facilities on the Pacific coast will be the building of a breakwater at Chemainus. For over 70 years Chemainus has loaded timber for all parts of the world and has contributed greatly to the economy of Canada. I hope every consideration will be given to the building of this breakwater, because Chemainus is certainly a part of the trade and commerce of Canada.
(Translation):


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Chairman, this morning's discussion concerning the sale of grain to red China took an extraordinary turn.
I followed it with great interest. The government and the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Hees) were clearly on the defensive.
I have read a number of times the statement made on May 2 by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hamilton), and I noted particularly a paragraph on page 4205 of Hansard in which the minister said:
A sale of this order will spread substantial benefits through the Canadian economy.
In the same statement, the minister had previously announced a deal of some $362 million.
That is what the Minister of Agriculture said, that is what we understood and what Canadian newspapers and the Canadian people understood.
But there is more. In this morning's Gazette, we find the following statement made by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Green):
(Text):
External Affairs Minister Green said yesterday that the big Canadian grain sale to communist China might be one of the many factors taken into consideration in the recognition of red China in the United Nations.
(Translation):
The government very definitely gave us the impression that this grain deal with communist China was worth $362 million.
If we go carefully over the details supplied by the Minister of Agriculture in the statement he made on Tuesday, May 2, we note the following facts.
First of all, the minister referred to the sale of 40 million bushels of wheat and barley, valued at approximately $60 million contracted between the Canadian wheat board and the China Resources Company. That is the first sale, a bilateral contract between China and Canada.


Second, the minister informed us that there is an additional sale to China of 2.2 million bushels of wheat, valued at $3.7 million, for shipment during March to May 1961. This is also a sale that puts China, as well as Canada, under certain bilateral obligations.
The minister then made another statement about a $66 million contract, signed under a long term agreement, by which China and Canada have mutually committed themselves, the latter to deliver goods, the former to pay an agreed price.
I therefore submit that there are three contracts, duly signed, and imposing a legal obligation upon China and Canada.
As for the rest of his statement, I suggest we have again been victims of a new vision. In fact, this agreement for $362 million worth of wheat and barley is only a promise to buy on the part of China. It is therefore on the part of Canada a unilateral commitment under which it would undertake to keep available for China 186.7 million bushels of wheat and 46.7 million bushels of barley from the 1st of June, 1961 to December 1963. Moreover, China would not be bound to buy the above mentioned quantities during this period.
Therefore for China this would amount to no more than an insurance policy covering the period from June 1961 to December 1963, in case its future crops fail to fill the gap that might exist in this year's wheat and barley crops.
What impressed me most this morning is that the matter was pointed out to the Minister of Trade and Commerce with a request that he then give an explanation concerning this agreement. Well, the minister found nothing better to do than read again parts of the statement made to last May 2 by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hamilton). Unquestionably, these are disturbing facts we are now facing and not only are we entitled to an explanation but we also have the right to ask that any agreement signed by this government and the government of China, or a Chinese wheat committee, be tabled immediately, so that we may know whether we have not been left under a false impression following the statement made by the Minister of Agriculture on May 2.
Mr. Chairman, it would be proper at this stage, while we are on the subject of agreements, to review the fundamentals of any sales contract.
What is a sales contract? Let me refer to the civil code of the province of Quebec, section 1472, which reads as follows:
A sale is a contract whereby a person gives something to another person for a price in money which the latter undertakes to pay.

Mr. Chairman, first, it is essential for me to know the facts. In the Ottawa Journal of May 3, may be read the following statement made by the Minister of Agriculture, following a question put to him by Richard Jackson, a newspaperman.
(Text):
But wasn't trade a two-way street, and didn't the Chinese hope to recover some of their $326 million through sales of their own to Canada?
Could be, agreed Mr. Hamilton.
(Translation):
Well, Mr. Chairman, after all this window dressing about a sale which, in the main, is nothing of the kind, I think we are entitled to some explanations. In my opinion, it is quite obvious, in the light of the facts now given us, that the government of China has contracted no legal obligation in regard to the greater amount of money concerned for the purchase of that wheat. If we re-read the statement made by the Minister of Agriculture, the only conclusion we arrive at is that both the public and parliament were left under a false impression, an impression that even the figures provided by the minister fail to support. Therefore, I think we are entitled to demand the tabling of all documents and agreements concluded and signed, that we may know the actual scope of the sales made; in other words, in order that we may have the whole truth.
(Text):


Mr. Crouse:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make just a few brief remarks. It is not often that I find myself in agreement with the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate. However, in this instance I wish to endorse his remarks with regard to the salt fish situation.
All of us who represent fishing ridings are vitally concerned with this problem. At the present time there is a surplus of heavy salt codfish, and every effort is being made by the industry to move this surplus. As a matter of fact, some 200 tons were recently offered to Portugal at unprofitable prices. Although a sale has not been made, negotiations are still going on. Even if the sale is made we will still have abnormally heavy stocks for this time of year, particularly with the loss of the Cuban market, which was open to us a year ago.
In addition, sales of heavy salted pollack to the Dominican Republic have declined. This is due to their loss of purchasing power. As a result the Saguenay Shipping Company has reluctantly reduced its service to this area to once a month. This has created further hardship for both shippers and those who are in a position to buy.
As I mentioned, it is very important to the east coast that we move the present stocks of salted fish and that these stocks be reduced 90205-6-2744
Supply-Trade and Commerce as soon as possible to a level where there is not likely to be any large carryover at the beginning of next season. If this is not done there is always the risk that an exporter may completely disorganize one or more of the regular markets by deciding to reduce his stock by selling at abnormally low prices. If this should be done it is obvious what the result would be, and not only to present Canadian exporters. If a large carryover is on hand it will abnormally reduce the price when fish are landed in the 1961 season.
I wish to bring this important matter to the attention of the minister. The situation is very serious. Possibly the minister could arrange to increase the amount of fish that is sold in the West Indies market. In any event, I am pleased to have this opportunity to bring this important problem to the minister's attention.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Chairman, there is one additional matter about which I thought the minister would say something today, particularly in light of the fact that notwithstanding his disclaimer earlier in the session the minister has a responsibility along with the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Finance. As we know, the only positive program brought forward by the administration this year, apart from the limited winter works program, to provide a solution or mitigation for unemployment was the proposal of the Minister of Finance for the application of the principle of accelerated depreciation to assist industry to locate in areas where heavy pockets of unemployment now persist.
I am sure the government's proposal for double depreciation, as the minister called it in his budget speech of December 18, commended itself in principle to most people in the country as a constructive approach to this problem. But when analysis is given to the proposal it is apparent that what the government has in fact brought forward is not a very effective application of this principle.
The proposal is that there shall be double depreciation extended for one year to industry under certain conditions and where it is located in an area of chronic unemployment. The contention is made, and I repeat it now, that this program, in so far as it concerns the relocation of industry or encouraging industry to stay where it is already, will not bring forward one single case.
The minister has a responsibility in connection with this matter. He has not properly outlined exactly what his role in this program is to be. It has to do, of course, with the importation of certain articles which will have to do with encouragement of new industry, and I think the minister ought to tell the house now what progress has been made in this matter.
4344	HOUSE OF
Supply-Trade and Commerce
The minister should indicate whether the government has received any indication from any part of the country that there is to be a voluntary relocation of industry. Unless we have some satisfactory explanation we must conclude that this program is nothing more than a facade. I am convinced that this is all it is. It is part of the government's method of trying to create the impression that it is doing something to meet this serious problem of unemployment.
The Minister of Labour, when he presents his estimates, will be called on to report his achievements with regard to this program, as will the Minister of Finance. We are now dealing with the Department of Trade and Commerce, and we should have from the minister some indication of the number of applications which have been received, together with an indication of what this is going to mean in keeping down the numbers of unemployed and preventing a recurrence of unemployment.
What we shall want from the minister is not his usual friendly display of apparent good humour. What we shall want from the minister is a report which will indicate that this program has substance and is not merely a facade. The minister has been very active in meeting with his trade commissioners. He has been very active, he tells us, in meeting with the industrialists of this country, although I see he has begun to scold the industrialists for failing, he says, to follow the directions he has given.
In any event, the Minister of Labour is not alone responsible for doing something about unemployment. That is a responsibility which must be shared by all members of the government, notably by those responsible for the Department of Trade and Commerce, the Department of Finance, the Department of Defence Production, the Department of National Defence, the Department of National Health and Welfare and others. This is a responsibility which does not belong only to the little Minister of Labour. It is one which also devolves on the shoulders of the big Minister of Trade and Commerce. I think we are entitled to hear from the minister some indication of what the program means in practical results.
The hon. gentleman has changed his understanding as to the responsibility of the government toward unemployment. Only two or three months ago he said this was a problem which was now outside the scope of government responsibility, that it was something which was the responsibility of all the people of Canada. This is not, of course, what the Minister of Trade and Commerce said when he spoke on this subject when in opposition as a private member. Nor is it what he said


as one of the chief tune makers of the administration during the elections of 1957 and 1958. The minister cannot hope to satisfy members of this committee merely by his friendly manner, his engaging smile and the fine impression we gather when we look at him. Fine impressions of this sort are not sufficient to warrant a conclusion that the minister is fully discharging his responsibility.
I should like to hear from the Minister of Trade and Commerce today what his solution is to the problem of unemployment. He has a responsibility in this matter. The Prime Minister made a most amazing statement when he said that the Bladen royal commission was not one which concerned the Department of Trade and Commerce but was of primary concern to the Department of Finance. I do not know whether this means that the government intends to take some fiscal steps at long last. I do not know whether this foreshadows the abolition of the excise tax on automobiles. I hope it means that, and I hope it means other things as well. But I cannot conceive that the Minister of Trade and Commerce would concur in the view stated by the Prime Minister that his department is not vitally concerned with whatever recommendations are made by Professor Bladen with regard to an industry which means so much to Canada.
I have not in the past pursued the Minister of Trade and Commerce on his estimates, but I do pursue him today in respect of this matter because I want some indication, and I believe this committee and the whole country want some indication, of how this program of double depreciation is developing and what it is doing to meet the objective set for it. The Minister of Trade and Commerce has an opportunity now of telling us exactly what has been done in this regard.


George Harris Hees: I was most interested to hear the hon. member for Essex East describe his imagined difficulties in getting a straight answer from me. It took me back to the days when he sat on this side of the house. Hon. members who sat in opposition in those days will remember what an operation it was at any time, whether on the orders of the day or on the hon. gentleman's estimates, to get any sort of an answer from him. It was really a big day in our lives if we could get the hon. member for Essex East, who was then minister of national health and welfare, to give us even a partial answer to our questions.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if the minister would permit me to ask him a question. Is the minister seeking to model himself upon the hon. member for Essex East?


George Harris Hees: I certainly am not; and as the hon. member tor Bonavista-Twillingate knows, having watched me across this chamber for four years, I have tended in the completely opposite direction. But when I hear the hon. member for Essex East describe what he imagines to be me-I guess he was in the same seat four years ago-then my mind goes back to the good old days when he was here and giving the kind of answers about which he is complaining today.
With regard to the hon. member's question, there have been about 200 applications for double depreciation allowance in respect of buildings or machinery connected with the manufacture of products that are new in Canada. These are under careful study by my department at the present time to ascertain whether the granting of double depreciation would be justified. As of April 26 last 28 areas had applied to be designed as surplus areas, and as of that date one of those areas had been so designated by the Department of Labour, the area of Cornwall. This plan is in operation, as the hon. member knows, for three years and the double depreciation allowance can be taken in any one of those three years.


Paul Joseph James Martin: When was the first of the 200 applications submitted to the government?


George Harris Hees: I am advised it was a month or six weeks ago.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Six weeks ago, and only one has so far been positively dealt with?


George Harris Hees: These are matters of great importance, and they have to be dealt with very carefully to make sure that no applications which are justified should be turned down. They are being studied intensively, as I have said, and it is our intention to give a well considered reply as quickly as it can be done. I can assure the hon. gentleman that there has been no unnecessary delay in this regard.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The minister says there has been no unnecessary delay. I want to indicate to him that I know the application of the city of Windsor was put in over a month ago. It was approved, I have been advised, by the hon. gentleman's department and was sent to the office of the privy council over ten days ago. A government which is disposed to deal with unemployment in a vigorous way is not going to allow delays of this kind to take place.
Not only is this program ineffective because of the fact that it only operates for one full period of 12 months, but to the extent
Supply-Trade and Commerce that it has any value at all the three departments of government concerned are obviously not displaying the kind of vigour which a problem as urgent as this requires. The government cannot hope to convince the country that it is doing anything serious about unemployment when, first of all, it brings forward such a limited formula, and then takes so long to deal with the applications. Only one area has been designated. The government has the criteria and all the facts so this delay can only mean one thing, and that is that this government has not diligently met this problem in accordance with the opportunities presented by its own declaration of policy.


Mr. Chevrier:: Mr. Chairman, with no intention of holding up the estimates, as I know the minister is anxious to have them passed, I should like briefly to discuss this matter. There is a point to be made first in connection with the delays which have been encountered in designating these depressed areas, as well as the weakness of the policy in general. I think it has been stated in the house before, and perhaps it is well that it be stated again, that the policy which the government has presented, with reference to assistance to depressed areas, is not one which is going to be of very much use.
To substantiate that statement all I have to do is refer to a statement made by a prominent industrialist in this country in a speech he made at a Progressive Conservative meeting held in Toronto. He said words to this effect. Where is the industry that is going to establish itself in any area in Canada when all it will receive is double depreciation for a period of one year over a period of three years? He indicated quite clearly that this was of no use. While I do not know what the political affiliation of this gentleman is, he lost no time in condemning the government for that policy.
There are areas in Canada which are depressed. They need not be publicized, but it is a fact, and the minister should know, that little if anything is being done by means of this policy to assist those areas. At the moment I have particularly in mind areas in the province of Quebec and the Atlantic provinces. We have repeatedly placed on record here what we think should be done to assist secondary industry. The Minister of Finance, the Minister of National Revenue and the Minister of Trade and Commerce have repeatedly indicated in this house the proposals they had in mind, and the government has brought in legislation in this respect. But having brought in that legislation to give assistance to secondary industry these ministers tell us, in their next breath, that

Supply-Trade and Commerce they have not used this policy or, if they have done so, it has been done very irregularly.
I think the time has come for positive action rather than negative action, particularly in the field of secondary industry. I am not going back to the debate which was entered into in this house having to do with the Atlantic economic area, when we supported a proposed amendment to the motion to go into supply, but it indicated one way of encouraging assistance to manufacturing industries. There are other ways, such as income tax exemptions, loans, subventions, and more particularly specialization in certain groups of industries. We have indicated on more than one occasion that the government-not overnight, because this is a matter which cannot be done overnight but will take a number of years-could assist industries in specialization. Certainly the program which the Minister of Trade and Commerce has been given to administer is not one which is going to be of much benefit to those areas.
The next point I had in mind when I rose had to do with the delays which have been encountered in dealing with these applications. The minister has told us there have been 200 applications.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, may I correct that statement. I have just received further information in this regard, and can now say that there have been 200 applications for double depreciation in regard to machinery and products new to Canada, but only 10 applications have arisen out of these inquiries. In addition, there have been 28 applications for designation as surplus manpower areas.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is an even worse situation.


Lionel Chevrier: That situation is entirely different from the one which the minister certainly indicated to us a moment ago.


George Harris Hees: I corrected the figures as soon as I received the information.


Lionel Chevrier: I am grateful to the minister for his correction, but 200 applications for double depreciation in respect of machinery and equipment, and 28 applications for double depreciation because of a depressed area, are two different things, not akin one to the other.
I take it there are 28 applications which have been filed for assistance under the new policy and that only one such application has been approved. I too, along with my colleague from Essex East, deprecate the delay in dealing with these applications. It seems to me that the government could show a great deal more celerity than it has in the past.


The main point is, as anyone who has studied this policy will realize, that the policy in itself is not sufficient. A great deal more will have to be done to give assistance to depressed areas.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should like to ask the
minister one or two questions about this subject. It seems from the last figures the minister gave that two things are being confused. As I understand the policy, and I hope the minister will correct me promptly if I am wrong, there are two kinds of things which can be applied for. An area can apply to be classed as a depressed area-a totally unnecessary thing in our view-and when the area has been so classed, any industry in that area, whether it is producing new products or not, may apply for double depreciation.


George Harris Hees: That is right.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Also, any industry in any part of Canada can apply for double depreciation in the production of new products. I think it would be helpful to the committee in understanding this question if the minister would say how many areas have applied. I know those applications have to be made to the Minister of Labour, but I assume that these two ministers are still talking to one another, particularly in view of the zeal of the Minister of Trade and Commerce regarding this program.
It will not do an area much good to be called a depressed area unless someone in that area applies for double depreciation. That is the minister's responsibility, and he ought to know about it from the start. I assume that he does. I think we should know how many areas have applied to be classed as depressed areas, and how many industries in those areas have applied for double depreciation. We ought to know how many industries in other parts of Canada have applied for double depreciation for new products. We should be given the three separate statistics involved, and I should ask the minister if he can give us this information.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make it clear that applications in respect of surplus manpower areas-not depressed areas -are made to the Department of Labour, and the decision is made in that department as to whether an area is or is not a surplus manpower area. There have been 28 such applications.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Only one has been dealt with.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, one has been classified as such, not dealt with. These applications are all under examination and consideration. One area has been classed as a surplus manpower area, and that is the area of Cornwall.
The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate is correct when he suggests that when one of these areas has been classified as a surplus manpower area any industry in that area can apply for double depreciation. In addition, applications can be made by industries in any part of the country for double depreciation in respect of the manufacture of products which are considered to be new products in Canada. We have had approximately 200 inquiries from industries of that kind which have resulted in 10 formal applications for double depreciation.


Mr. Bourgei:: Can the minister give a breakdown of the number of applications by provinces?


George Harris Hees: Yes, we have that information here. The applications for areas to be designated as surplus manpower areas are as follows: Nova Scotia, 7; New Brunswick, 9; Quebec, 6; Ontario, 4; Manitoba, 1; Alberta, 1; total, 28. This is the total as of April 22.


Mr. Nixon:: Can the minister say whether Elliot Lake applied and was the application considered?


George Harris Hees: I am advised that that area did apply.


Mr. Pitman:: Mr. Chairman, I had expected that the discussion on surplus manpower areas would take place on the estimates of the Minister of Labour. However, I am very happy to join in the discussion at this particular time.
About a week or so ago I placed a question on the order paper asking how many areas had been named as not distressed areas but surplus manpower areas. As the Minister of Trade and Commerce has just said, 28 areas have been so named. It seems to me incredible, since this program was announced late last year and, after a good deal of prodding by the hon. member for Essex East, a system was finally devised under which designated surplus manpower areas were to be named, that here we are in May and only one area has been so named. I can remember the Minister of Labour standing up and congratulating the government for not knowing of the areas because so few had applied. But here we find that 28 have applied and only one has been designated.
I should like to know just what system is being used to determine what is a surplus
Supply-Trade and Commerce manpower area. I understood the whole system was based on the fact that the Department of Labour began to get statistics of surplus manpower areas in 1953. I went to the trouble of going down to the basement of the library and digging out all the Labour Gazettes and looking at Peterborough to see just where it stood. I discovered that this particular constituency had a labour manpower surplus, and could be designated as a surplus manpower area only 66 per cent of the time. When I last spoke on this particular measure I suggested that this was a ridiculous system for an industrialized area where fluctuations can take place very quickly. I discovered, and I congratulate them most heartily, that the members of the city council have come down here and asked whether their city could be named a surplus manpower area. Members of the staff of the Department of Labour are now going into the constituency to discover whether it should be named as a surplus manpower area.


Paul Joseph James Martin: They should have gone in on their own initiative.


Walter George Pitman: The point I wish to raise is this.


Hazen Robert Argue: Which side are you on?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am against it, but I think they should have gone in on their own initiative.


Walter George Pitman: If this is a definite system that has been established, and if everybody knows what the criteria are, why should it take this length of time to decide whether or not an area is a surplus manpower area? It took me approximately 45 minutes to look through the Labour Gazette and discover whether Peterborough was. I can see no reason why the minister should have to bring in the whole city council of Peterborough, or the labour officials, to discover this if the criterion is, as the Minister of Labour suggested, based on statistics which have been available since 1953. I think this is something which should be cleared up. It is a matter of some embarrassment. For example, I was questioned by people in my own constituency as to whether the constituency should be named a surplus manpower area, and I simply replied that I had gone through the Labour Gazette. I suggested that maybe other people could convince this government that we need every kind of assistance we could possibly get. I am not saying that this particular type of assistance is going to be much good but nevertheless we grasp at straws in this particular situation. I suggested to those people that they should make every attempt to get assistance but I indicated on the basis of the
4348	HOUSE OF
Supply-Trade and Commerce study I had made that, in the months between November and May in the years 1953 to 1960, in only 66 per cent of those months could this area be classed as a surplus manpower area. Moreover, there were only two months during this period in which this area could be called more than a moderate surplus manpower area.
This is something which should be a matter of some concern. Perhaps the reason that this government has received very few applications is that nobody actually knew what the system was. I think it is about time that we found out exactly what are the criteria and just exactly how we are going to use them. In other words, why was this area declared a surplus manpower area? If it is not going to be based on the statistics which have been available since 1953 in the Labour Gazette, a magazine put out by the Department of Labour, if it is possible we should be told what the basis will be from this point forward.


George Harris Hees: I have sent for the criteria from the Department of Labour. As I have pointed out, the matter of designating surplus manpower areas comes under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Labour, and not under mine. I would be very glad to get a statement concerning the criteria and send it over to the hon. member. I think he will agree that the actual designation is not my responsibility. Once an area has been designated a surplus manpower area, then my department handles it. As I say, I have asked for a statement concerning the criteria from the Department of Labour and I will send it over to the hon. member.


Lionel Chevrier: I believe the minister is technically correct in the answer which he just made; it is the Department of Labour which decides-


Paul Joseph James Martin: What is a surplus area.


Lionel Chevrier: What is a surplus manpower area; but there is one thing that does clearly come under the minister's department, namely the depreciation aspect. Once an area has been designated as a surplus manpower area, then what can be depreciated is a matter for decision by the Department of Trade and Commerce. I should like to ask the minister what can be depreciated in a depressed or surplus manpower area?


George Harris Hees: I am advised that it is any new machinery, equipment or plant.


Lionel Chevrier: May I just follow that up. Is that over and above the double depreciation for one year in the surplus manpower area, or is it separate and aside-


George Harris Hees: No, Mr. Chairman. If a plant is in an area designated as a surplus manpower area then it can apply for double depreciation for one year for new plant, equipment or machinery.


Lionel Chevrier: That applies no matter where an industry is in Canada, for a new product, as it is now?


George Harris Hees: Yes, that is correct, for a new product, but it applies to machinery or plant which is used to manufacture any product.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Does it not also apply to plants already in existence in an area that has been designated as a distressed area. The provision for double depreciation will also apply to goods that have heretofore been produced in that area? I want to justifiably depreciate the program of the government, but in fairness I want to indicate some positive features of this plan, as it presents a good picture in principle. If the minister will answer this question I will make my further comment.


George Harris Hees: Yes, it applies in an area designated as a surplus manpower area, to any plant, machinery or equipment that is new, for the manufacture of any product.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I was trying to help the minister to indicate that it went further than that. If he will look at the order in council he will find that it applies as well to a plant already in existence in a distressed area and in respect of the production of goods in that plant in that distressed area. But the point is that the program is not going to be of any value whatsoever because this is a program designed to be operative for one year only. Surely it cannot possibly achieve anything approaching a substantial solution to the problem of unemployment or the mitigation of it.
We have had an amazing revelation today from the minister as to the number of applications in respect of those applications that come under his jurisdiction. He has, in addition, given us the number of areas that have made application for the program under the Minister of Labour. But the statistics clearly show how bankrupt this program is. It is inconceivable that a government, faced with the problem of unemployment we have in this country at the present time, should seek to try to put over the house and the people of Canada the impression that this is a program that is really seriously designed to deal with unemployment. I doubt whether any government in Canadian history has ever brought forward a program which on the slightest examination has been revealed to be so inadequate and so unworthy of presentation in this house.

I say to the Minister of Trade and Commerce that if he alone had the responsibility for this matter I am sure, whatever might have been the weaknesses in the thinking processes that might have accompanied the idea, the program would at least have had much greater substance than this. For the government to think that it can put over the house, the businessmen of the nation and the unemployed of the country the idea that this program designed for one year is capable of doing the job is a simply monstrous suggestion. It is part of the pattern of behaviour of the government from the beginning of this session.
The government will be able to say, "See what we have done. We have brought forward a program of double depreciation. We have brought forward a program to provide for vocational rehabilitation". In fact all the government has done has been to bring forward in a new form an idea and program that have been in existence in this country for 12 years. "See what we have done," the government will say. "We have brought forward the productivity council". But at the same time hon. members opposite do not tell the unsuspecting public that this program is to be effective only in the long range future. "See what we have done," hon. gentlemen opposite will say, "We have brought forward legislation to assist small business," when in fact all they have done has been to bring forward legislation to assist in the improvement of the premises of certain business categories.
I say to the Minister of Trade and Commerce this program is not an effective one. This program in principle could be an effective one but it would have to be a program that would give relief by way of accelerated depreciation for an extended period. Why does the minister not do what has been done in England? Why does he not do what has been done in Belgium and in West Germany? In the case of these countries the lowest period prevailing under such programs is, I believe, eight years.
If we had a program that was going to be in existence for a period of eight years there would be some inducement for a company to move from Toronto to Essex county or from Ottawa to Cornwall where there is a serious unemployment problem. In Cornwall over 16 per cent of the work force is out of work. But what company is going to move from Ottawa to Cornwall when all it is going to get is the benefit of this principle of double depreciation for one year?
I say to the government members that they do not like it when we criticize them for not doing anything about unemployment. They characterize our efforts as being those of men 90205-6-275
Supply-Trade and Commerce who are simply bent on presenting the gloomiest picture and delighting in it. Well, that is an argument but it is not a fair argument; it is not an honourable argument. Today we are face to face with an examination of the government program, a program that was vaunted by the Minister of Finance in the baby budget. The word went out throughout the country that the government at long last had recognized the urgency of the problem and was going to do something along the lines of the program that had been followed in the United Kingdom. It took two and a half months of prodding on our part to elicit from the Minister of Trade and Commerce, the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Labour and the Prime Minister some indication as to when this program might be presented, and finally after two and a half months what did we get? This anaemic child, this puny child from a government which represents itself as a giant in its vision and in its desire to meet the problem of unemployment.
I say that there is no program this government has brought forward that has brought it into greater disrepute than this particular program, and that it is no credit to a government that should have brought forward serious legislation in the house.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, the only comment I should like to make is to congratulate the hon. member most genuinely because, after making the identical speech on at least 12 other occasions in the house during this session, he is able again today to simulate that righteous indignation which he is so skilled in simulating. Truly the stage lost a great actor when the hon. member for Essex East decided to go into politics.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Chairman, this personal remark is one to which I have no objection. I thank the minister for the compliment, but I want the committee and the country to know that all the minister has said in reply to what I have said is that I have repeated positions formerly taken and that in the repetition I have displayed a histrionic and dramatic skill which he admires. He has said nothing about the substance of my criticism and I can only take it that the fact that the minister sits there now blushing indicates that he recognizes and is greatly embarrassed by the kind of program that the government has brought forward. I say that the minister's silence indicates clearly that down in his heart he knows this is the kind of program with which he wishes he had nothing to do.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask the minister if it would be a correct summary of the statistics he gave us to say that out of the applications received by

Supply-Trade and Commerce the Department of Labour lor areas to be declared to be surplus manpower areas only one area has been so declared-


Mr. Marlin (Essex Easl):: Cornwall.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -and that of the applications for double depreciation there has been none approved yet. Is that correct?


George Harris Hees: I said that out of 28 applications by areas to be designated as surplus manpower areas one was so designated as of April 26 last. We have received 10 applications for double depreciation from areas other than surplus manpower areas. These have all been under very intensive consideration since they were received within the last month or six weeks and we expect to be able to make our decisions very soon.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The plain fact is that five months after the introduction of the baby budget absolutely no company in this country is receiving double depreciation at the present time. There is no company whose application has been allowed five months after this program was announced by the Minister of Finance. That is a single sentence summary of the minister's report of progress on this program.


Walter George Pitman: Mr. Chairman, under item one I should like to refer to another matter which is of particular interest to me and which I am sure has far less political significance than what we have just been discussing. It has to do with the dominion bureau of statistics. The dominion bureau of statistics is certainly a very admirable organization. However, I should like to read a resolution which was passed by the county council in my area. It is in these words:
Whereas the number of requests for statistical information with accompanying forms required from municipalities from various government departments is steadily increasing, with accompanying demands on municipal officials.
Whereas these reports increase the work of local staff, necessitating increased personnel with additional cost to the taxpayer. As an example we wish to cite a new monthly form requested under the caption of "Government and Payroll'' requested by the dominion bureau of statistics.
Therefore be it resolved that by unanimous agreement the council of the county of Peterborough in regular session assembled requests the support and co-operation of the dominion and provincial governments in the elimination of duplication and growing volume of statistics required to be filled out by our county and local offices. These reports are increasing the work of local staffs and will certainly require additional staff at our local level in the near future.
This particular resolution was sent to all the counties in Ontario. Within the last couple of weeks or so a stack of letters has been received stating that the councils in all parts of Ontario had unanimously endorsed


this resolution. Certainly, our civilization is becoming more complex. We need more and more research and, therefore, more and more statistics. This is not a political situation at all. This situation would obtain if our friends to the left were in office or if our friends across the aisle were to remain in office.
The point is the municipalities are finding the work extremely burdensome. The problem is not one limited to municipalities and counties but is one which businessmen face as well. I feel it is about time we spent less effort trying to devise new forms and more effort trying to get co-operation between the various government departments. An example of the situation which has developed is seen in one statistical form which requests information be sent to the bureau of statistics which has already been transmitted to the provincial government. This form requires from municipalities certain information concerning debenture debt. The county treasurer has to dig out all the records for the year before to secure the information, and this requires hours and hours of labour. The annoying aspect of the matter is that the information has already been submitted. Indeed, I believe in many cases it has already been published.
One county clerk and treasurer of tremendous ability has estimated that 75 per cent of the information being sent to the dominion bureau of satisfies has already been submitted to the provincial governments or some other organization. Has the minister something he would like to say by way of reply?


George Harris Hees: Yes, this is an important matter to which the hon. member has referred. I am very glad to be able to advise him that discussions have already begun between the dominion bureau of statistics and the Ontario department of municipal affairs to ascertain whether or not this duplication can be avoided. We are aware of it, and the matter is now in hand.


Walter George Pitman: I do thank the minister for those remarks.


George Harris Hees: I should like to mention also that this matter was brought to my attention by the hon. member for Hastings-Frontenac, who is keenly interested in this matter.


Walter George Pitman: I am sure that this information will lead me to curtail my remarks. I hope that this meeting will seek to gain the cooperation of the various county clerks and treasurers, who are already overburdened, in doing the best possible job. In many areas the furnishing of this information means calling in extra help and, while this may be

one way of creating employment I am not sure it is the best way. I thank the minister for his remarks.


Mr. Peters:: Before this vote carries I should like to refer to a matter I mentioned last evening, the desirability of establishing a division of the Department of Trade and Commerce which would have as its goal the establishment of secondary industry in those areas in which, under the private enterprise system, it has not been established because the criterion used is the proximity to markets. Does the minister have something to say on this subject?


George Harris Hees: Yes, I am glad to tell the hon. member, and the members of the committee, about our domestic commerce service which was established in my department last August with an assistant deputy minister in charge. We consider of prime importance the matter of the development of secondary industry in this country. I should like to tell this committee something of the work of the industrial development branch which co-ordinates the federal government activities in the industrial development field. It assists Canadian companies considering expansion or seeking new products to manufacture. In addition, the branch seeks out and assists foreign companies interested in establishing plants in Canada.
The branch works closely in carrying out its functions with provincial governments, municipal bodies, business associations and other agencies interested in industrial development. In addition to supplying general information on domestic markets and trade to businessmen, the branch can provide special statistical information on imports and in the past few years has prepared an extensive number of import studies, the most recent being the study of the imports of chemical products. The branch has also been active in promoting licensing arrangements between Canadian and foreign companies. In this connection, it publishes regularly a bulletin entitled "New Methods and Products for Licensing in Canada". This bulletin lists various products and processes for which foreign companies are seeking Canadian production facilities. Other publications prepared by the branch in response to business requests provide information on taxes, tariffs, sources of financing, forms of business organizations and other matters related to doing business in Canada.
I think the hon. member, and other members, will agree that we are taking this matter very seriously indeed. We are doing everything we can to help new industries become established and to carry on their operations successfully. The branch is ready 90205-6-275i
Supply-Trade and Commerce and willing to receive inquiries, either by mail or in person, from any business firm that wants to come here and talk over matters with us. We believe that the most important means of providing jobs in Canada is by helping the development of secondary industry. I agree with the views expressed by the hon. member last night that this development must be carried forward with all possible speed and I should like to assure him my department will help secondary industry help itself in every possible way we can.


William Arnold Peters: I want to thank the minister for his remarks in this context. While this branch of the minister's department is new and has new ideas, it is probably going to be the most important aid to the development of industry in those areas that are now not getting industry. I was wondering whether or not the department has given any consideration to means other than those mentioned. We listened this afternoon to some discussion about one method for aiding industry, namely double depreciation. This is an inducement the government has provided to persuade industry to locate in an area.
Is the government giving consideration to some other methods? I suggest consideration might be given to the various types of inducement used in Great Britain, both during the war and after the war, to induce industry to disperse from overcrowded areas. I think Toronto would probably be in that category in Canada. Has the government investigated the methods used by other countries to move secondary industry into other areas?
Perhaps the word "subsidy" would not be acceptable to the present government and it might look with more favour on the word "inducement". Whatever method is used, it is apparent now in northern Ontario-it was not apparent five years ago-that we are going to have to provide some type of assistance to attract industry into that area, even if we call that state socialism.
We would not want to suggest to the minister that he go this far, but there are other inducements which perhaps have even more acceptable names than compulsory resettlement, or something of that nature, which I am sure could be investigated. I wondered whether the minister and the department are carrying out any investigation along this line. Inducements are going to be necessary, and I think everyone will agree that if a plan were operated on that basis it would make available larger markets for our products.
We suggest that the factory be located close to the natural resource concerned so that the finished product could be exported from that

Supply-Trade and Commerce area. There will need to be some encouragement on the part of the government to get industry to change the system.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, when firms indicate to us that they would like to establish branches in Canada, we point out the desirability of moving to areas which are designated as areas of surplus manpower. We do everything we can to try and persuade them to establish their plants in those areas, and we will continue to do this.
We have studied the English system very carefully. Their problems are different than ours, but the result they achieve is very good. We are studying the possibilities of influencing businesses to move to areas where employment is badly needed. I hope we will be able to work out a practical plan along that line in the not too distant future.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
400. 1961 Decennial census of Canada, $13,539,378.
Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words in connection with this matter, which is one of considerable importance, or at least it has been so described by the government. I should like first of all to refer to a speech made by the Prime Minister on "The Nation's Business" on April 12, 1961. During that speech on television the Prime Minister made the following statement:
For the first time in Canada's history, you, no matter what your racial origin may be, you have the opportunity of registering as a Canadian.
Mr. Chairman, that is not a true statement. That statement is not only inaccurate, but it is false. I think I can demonstrate that from information which I hold in my hand having to do with the decennial census of 1951 when the previous government was in office.
In the questionnaire which I hold in my hand and which was used in the year 1951, heading 16 is entitled "Citizenship (Nationality)", and the first answer given is "Canada". In other words, every Canadian citizen could describe himself in that fashion, as a citizen of Canada, in the census of 1951 and could answer the question truthfully in no other way.
Therefore I say without hesitation that the Prime Minister's statement is simply not in accordance with the facts and he is obviously seeking to claim credit for something with which his government had nothing to do. This, of course, is characteristic of the present government and I feel the record should be corrected in that respect.
I do, however, think that another statement made by the Prime Minister relating to this matter should be put on the record. This


statement can be found at page 749 of Hansard of June 13, 1940. At that time the Prime Minister said:
My criticism of the census is that, regardless of the number of generations that have elapsed or the admixtures of nationality that have taken place during 40, 50, 75 or 125 years, so long as persons must register under the nationality of their paternal ancestor, there will never be that Canadianism which we wish to establish.
I should like to say a word in connection with that statement. In 1940, when the Prime Minister made this statement, he said there would never be a Canadian spirit as long as our citizens were obliged to declare their ethnic origin. I certainly do not agree with that statement. It shows-I say this with all respect-a deep misunderstanding of the history and traditions of the Canadian people.
Of course, we all want to build and develop a united nation, a united and distinctive Canadian nation; but in order to maintain that unity in our country, diversity is also essential and important. Canadians never wanted to follow the policy and attitudes which existed in the United States melting pot, because there cultural diversity has in effect been banished. I believe we want in Canada, as the Leader of the Opposition has said so often, unity without uniformity.
Those two characteristics of the Canadian nation are reflected in questions 8 and 10. Question 8 asks for our nationality and question 10 for our origin. The first one is intended to stress the unity of our people, and I am sure that when question 8 is asked of those who have received their Canadian citizenship they will be very proud indeed to answer that they are Canadians.
Question 10, on the other hand, stresses the element of diversity which can be found in Canada and which most Canadians, I am sure, desire to preserve. This diversity of cultural origin has been in the past, and will be in the future, a great source of cultural enrichment for Canada.
French Canadians are not the only ones who are proud of their cultural ancestry. So are the English, Scots, Irish, Italian, German, Ukrainian and many others. This can be illustrated by the numerous St. Andrew's societies in all parts of Canada.
We want to continue to be informed, as we have in the past, of the composition and cultural origin of all Canadians, because we are convinced that in maintaining cultural diversity we will strengthen the unity of our country. This question, therefore, does not concern only those Canadians of French origin, but all other Canadians. I am convinced that the government was well advised to change its attitude and restore question 10 as it was in 1951, because the object of

this change will prevent any future weakening of that Canadian spirit and unity which all of us in this committee want to see
strengthened.
There is another aspect of this matter. It is that there is provided by this question a great deal of information which otherwise could not be obtained. It seems to me that a census should provide the most complete information about the composition of a people and since there are questions here having to do with age, occupation, marital status, religion, geographical distribution, spoken language and urban and rural density of population, why should there not be a question about racial origin? It is equally important to obtain information as to the racial origin of the individual because this is the only means by which Canadians of all ethnic groups can ascertain their numbers and their distribution across Canada. Why, then, should this question not be asked, since it has been asked since 1891? Why take it away now?
Again, the science of sociology requires that the census reveal the ethnic origin of Canadians. Thanks to the information which has been obtained from this question in the census it has been possible for sociologists to prepare and write works of great importance upon the concentration and the diversity of population in urban as well as rural areas. For these reasons I think it was well to restore the question as it was in 1951 and, as I have indicated on a former occasion, I believe the government was well advised in doing what it did. My regret at the moment is that the Prime Minister should have made the statement which he did creating the impression that this was the first time in history when this action has been taken. Such is not the case, as I have attempted to show.


George Harris Hees: I should like to answer the hon. member. With regard to question 10, the hon. member for Laurier said it simply restores the question to the form in which it had originally been presented. On the contrary, I believe we have improved question 10. The way that question is now asked, we are bound to get a correct answer. In other words, we shall have people answering as to their ethnic origin and nothing else. As we all know, the form in which the question was asked in 1951 led to 150,000 people answering incorrectly. They answered either "Canadian" or "unknown", thereby making the final figures incorrect. I think the hon. member will agree that the question as reworded now is greatly improved and I am sure we all welcome this because it is important that these figures as to ethnic origin should be correct.
Supply-Trade and Commerce


Lionel Chevrier: That was not the point of my intervention, that is, that the question had been reworded. My point was that the question on racial origins had been asked before. I think I have made it clear that in the census of 1951 both questions 16 and 17 make it evident that Canadian citizenship could be given as an answer to the former question and, of course, racial origin in answer to question 17. There was an attempt made to take that away in the 1961 census. That is why I said, I think with some degree of assurance, that the question had properly been restored.


George Harris Hees: I feel sure that when the Prime Minister spoke on this matter he meant that never before had the question been asked as directly as it is now. It is now impossible for anybody to misunderstand. The question is now "Are you a Canadian"? It is impossible to misunderstand that question and Canadians can answer with a straight "yes". There can be no misunderstanding at all. I am sure that is what the Prime Minister meant.
(Translation):


Mr. Pigeon:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words to commend the Prime Minister of Canada (Mr. Diefenbaker) who, in co-operation with the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Hees) and other members of the cabinet, had the census form completely revised, as it was not in accordance with scientific requirements.
I should like to read part of a letter from the dominion bureau of statistics, signed by the acting dominion statistician, Mr. Marshall, and I quote:
Canadian census, 1951
Before the 1951 Canadian census, the government then in office had instructed the dominion bureau of statistics to accept "Canadian" and "American" in reply to the question on "Origin".
It will be noted that the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier) was then minister of transport and therefore a member of the cabinet. I wonder why he did not protest such a decision at the time.
May I also point out to the house that national organizations such as the Conseil de la vie frangaise and the Societes Saint-Jean-Baptiste have commended the action of the government in setting that matter right and giving much greater force to our statistical data.
Finally, I should like to refer to the remarks made yesterday by the member for Port Arthur (Mr. Fisher). In part of his speech, he used what I think were uncalled for expressions in reference to the people of the province of Quebec. I must point out to the

Supply-Trade and Commerce
member for Port Arthur that such statements do not contribute to a strong and healthy national unity.
French speaking Canadians have their rights, just as English speaking Canadians have their rights, and if we want a powerful confederation, both groups must co-operate and be fair to each other.
Then too, I should like to emphasize this quotation from a statement made by Mr. Bourguiba, prime minister of Tunisia, during his visit to Canada:
Communism grows when it can take advantage of intolerable discontent, when feelings of dignity, freedom, justice and equality are trampled on.
I commend those words to the hon. member for Port Arthur, and I also point out to him that, instead of the word "communism", we might perhaps substitute the name of a certain movement which is emerging in part of Canada and which is described as being a national independence movement.
(Text):


John Whitney Pickersgill: Like the hon. member who has just spoken I should like to take some exception to what I think was-if I shall not be considered disrespectful in referring thus to the hon. member-a rather silly observation made yesterday by the hon. member for Port Arthur. I wish he was here to hear me say that because I felt it was very silly that a gentleman with the cultivation of the hon. member for Port Arthur-and I am not seeking to disparage it because the hon. member is a well educated and cultivated member of the house who frequently makes very valuable contributions to our debate which, like other hon. members, I very much appreciate-should make such observations. But I thought, yesterday, he was really indulging in what I call silliness when he said, for example, that when the census enumerator called around he was going to tell the census enumerator, whether it was question No. 10 or the next question, that he was a Canadian and that this nonsense of ethnic origins, as he called it, in terms of so many of the people of this country does not mean a thing.
That is nonsense, sir, but it is, of course, precisely what the Prime Minister said in 1940 when he was sitting on this side of the house, as the hon. member for Laurier pointed out by reading the quotation he read earlier. I do not know why some people are so anxious to suppress this inquiry into ethnic origin. Nobody is compelled to answer this question. You can say you do not know, and there will be a good many people who do not know. If you want to, at least when you have a Liberal government in this country,

you can say you are a Canadian or an Iroquois or anything you like, and you are not going to be haled before the courts. I hope the present minister is not going to take anybody before the courts if he insists his ethnic origin is Canadian.


George Harris Hees: The hon. member is quite correct.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is what Mr. St. Laurent said in the letter to which reference has been made. He said if an individual wanted to declare his ethnic origin as Canadian in this free country he would not be stopped. However, the vast majority of us are quite willing to attempt to give the best answer we can to this question. I admit that a lot of us are a little mixed up about this. I know perfectly well where my paternal grandfather came from; he was born in England, However, if I consider the first of my ancestors who came to Canada from the United States was descended from ancestors who were born in Holland, there is a nice question involved in the case of many of us to the predominant strain, but I suspect that these things iron themselves out, and that we reach a good average cross section by simply taking the ancestry of the paternal line.
What Mr. St. Laurent said in 1951, which was characteristic of his approach to problems of this kind, was that this is a free country and if anyone wants to declare his origin as Canadian, no one would stop him because we do not have a dictatorship. However, for the most part I think people will give the correct answer.
If the hon. member for Port Arthur, as an exercise in eccentricity, wants to have nothing to do with what he calls this nonsense about ethnic origin, I see no objection to that at all. It is his own affair, but I do not really think it is nonsense. I think, even if it were not for the historical problem, as the hon. member for Laurier has mentioned, involving the relationship between the two founding nations of this country on which our whole constitution is based, I think both sides have a right to have the best statistics which are available, and on which many of the conventions in the Canadian constitution rest. I say it is important to have that information as accurately as it can be acquired in a free society. I do not want any thumbscrews used to compel people to say they are one thing rather than another, but I do not feel most people will need that type of persuasion before giving the correct answer.
The hon. member for Port Arthur asked yesterday when we were going to have a chance in this country to be Canadians and to forget about this ethnic nonsense. I do not think a man is a worse Canadian because he is proud of the history of his ancestors

in the Ukraine. I do not think a man is a worse Canadian because he admits that his grandfather was born in England. I do not think a man is a worse Canadian because he can trace his ancestry back three centuries to some hamlet, village, seaport, or town in France. I think we are better Canadians for knowing more about ourselves, and I am very surprised that anyone should think the reverse. After all, we are trying to have a varied society, not to be like a lot of peas in a pod.
Then hon. member for Port Arthur also asked this question as reported at page 4305 of Hansard for May 3, 1961:
But I should like to ask the minister again: when, in Canada, are we going to be able to declare ourselves Canadians and not in terms of citizenship?
I do not know what he meant. If his words are transcribed correctly, I simply cannot figure out what they mean. How else are we going to declare ourselves Canadians except in terms of citizenship? That is what makes us Canadians, our citizenship.
Those of us on this side of the house who supported the hon. member for Essex East when, as secretary of state, he introduced the Canadian Citizenship Act which came into force on January 1, 1947, are very proud that our party happened to be in office and took the initiative in establishing that legislation which removed any doubt about citizenship.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Why did you wait until 1947?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. gentleman will have to wait, I should think, until the year 2047 before he is a member of any government and has a chance to do anything.
I might point out, since the hon. gentleman is seeking to introduce a partisan view, which I was attempting to avoid, that one of the reasons this was not done earlier was that the hon. gentleman's party contained a considerable number of people who did not want it done, but who preferred a colonial status to a national status. It has always been the view of Liberal governments that they should not force things down people's throats but should secure the general consent of the vast majority of people. We believe one person has as much right to an opinion as another, whether or not we agree with it. There is no doubt that, notwithstanding the view of what you might call the residual colonials in this country, most of them in the Tory party, there was by 1946 when my friend, the hon. member for Essex East introduced that historic bill, a general consensus among the Canadian people that we wanted to have an undoubted status
Supply-Trade and Commerce as Canadian citizens. I think even those residual colonials that were once in the Tory party are nearly extinct now.


Paul Joseph James Martin: There are two of them left.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There may be one or two of them left, but when I hear the Secretary of State for External Affairs, that old colonial, travelling around the country talking about independence, I realize that even the Tories have made some progress.
I think my friend, the hon. member for Laurier, was right in drawing attention to the statement made by the Prime Minister on April 12 on the television program "The Nation's Business", because that statement was not true. It cannot be fobbed off by saying it has something to do with racial origin. The Prime Minister said that, for the first time this government is allowing people to declare themselves as Canadians. That is not true. The first time individuals were allowed to declare themselves Canadians without any doubt of that status was when the Canadian Citizenship Act was brought into force in 1947, and that was reflected in the census questionnaire of 1951, as my friend the hon. member for Laurier has pointed out, which contained in respect of citizenship the word, "Canada". So that statement made by the Prime Minister was not true. That program is supposed to be the nation's business, not the nation's misinformation. It is impossible to believe that the Prime Minister was so unaware of the facts that he could have made that statement inadvertently, although I hope he did. At any rate, I repeat, that statement is not true.
What is true is that this government mis-guidedly and at considerable expense to the taxpayer, had printed a lot of forms which have had to be withdrawn and reprinted. While it may be that in technical language the question may now be a little better than it was in 1951, the actual meaning of the question is precisely the same. This government misguidedly tried to do something different and found that it had made a terrible boob. There was violent protest against what it did and, as a result, it did precisely that which was done by the Liberal government in 1951. We are very pleased that the government did this, and we commend hon. gentlemen opposite for their judgment in doing so. There is no controversy about this in the house now except for those extraordinary excursions into the realm of fancy and fantasy-the extraordinary "vols de pigeons" made by the hon. member for J oliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm.
4356	HOUSE OF
Supply-Trade and Commerce


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I am always confused about this racial origin question, and sometimes the hon. member for Port Arthur makes suggestions in this regard which I do not understand. I am pleased to know that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate is also in the same category as myself in not having the same mental capacity as the member for Port Arthur. Sometimes we just do not understand what he is saying. This is not his fault, it is ours.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is ours?


William Arnold Peters: I am also concerned over the fact that this little group should be attacked all the time.


An hon. Member:: You are not objecting.


William Arnold Peters: We are not objecting to it very strenuously but it seems surprising that many times we find ourselves in the position of being the opposition of not only one government but two, namely the one we had before and the one we have now. We will bear up under the strain, although at times we find it amazing.
If I can speak only for myself, may I say I am very happy over the fact that we are able to declare our Canadian origin. Also, I am not in complete disagreement with the fact that we are able to indicate what is our ethnic origin, but I think it is a very misleading question to most of us. I think there are really two kinds of people in the world, namely those who are Irish and those who would like to be. Those of us who do not know what we are immediately put down that we are Irish, anyway, and probably this is the reason why the number who declare themselves as of Irish ethnic origin is so large.


Mr. Small:: That gives you at least a bit of respectability.


William Arnold Peters: I agree that it is probably not the main part of my ethnic origin, it is only a very small part. But it seems to me that some of our claims to origin are rather ridiculous. I had an opportunity to observe this because I worked with a chap at one time who would have told you that he was French. When you checked you found that he was born in Mont Laurier, but his father was a Scotsman and did not speak much French, particularly when he got drunk. At that time he could not say anything in that particular language. The children were raised to speak French. I presume there was a bit of understanding among the family because they did learn some English as well. If you asked that man what was his ethnic origin I am quite sure he would have said French; but they were not French at all. His name was MacMillan. For reasons which we need IMr. Pickersgill.]

not go into, for a time he called himself St. Amour and it was a somewhat appropriate name at the time because he spoke English rather badly. This was no fault of his. Until he reached a late age he had spoken only French.
Before very many years go by there will be people who will claim they belong to this ethnic origin or to that, but they will not have my particular background. I think it is true to say, and it will be more true as the years go by, that most of us have not the faintest notion what would be the predominant origin if we were honest about our ethnic origin. I do not think there has been any new blood introduced in my nationality on either side in Canada for five generations. It is so mixed up that I think it would be rather difficult to know-


An hon. Member:: You are inbred.


William Arnold Peters: We are really not inbred but we certainly are Canadian and are very proud and happy to have this opportunity of declaring it.
I have not seen this year's census form and I should like to ask the minister whether it is similar to the forms which asked various questions about property, the location of property, whether you were in agriculture, how many cows were on the farm, and that sort of thing?


George Harris Hees: Yes. I have sent over to the hon. member a copy of the census form, Mr. Chairman. It is very similar to the form of recent years. Some changes have been made, of which all hon. members have been made aware.


William Arnold Peters: This is exactly what I thought it would be. For this reason I want to raise a problem. This problem was raised yesterday in another context, and it is one that I had a great deal of difficulty in following. When I finish discussing it the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate will be able to understand as I do, even though he may have been confused yesterday. It relates to this matter of appointing census people.
I have no particular interest in who are appointed from my riding as census commissioners. I should like to read what has been said because I think the parliamentary secretary confused the situation considerably in the minds of the Canadian people when he answered several questions. I should like to refer to the question which was raised on March 29 and which is to be found on page 3445 of Hansard. The question was asked by the hon. member for Nickel Belt, and reads as follows:
1. Are workers being recruited at present for the taking of the census?

2. If so, what method of recruitment is used, and are local offices of the unemployment insurance commission asked to provide personnel for census taking?


Mr. E. L. Morris (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, many thousands of Canadians will be employed in the important national undertaking of the 1961 census of Canada this year. Several hundred are being recruited by the civil service commission of Canada to augment regional office staffs of the dominion bureau of statistics across Canada and the head office at Ottawa, and in this phase of the work the commission is following its customary relationship with the national employment service. In addition, some 1,300 commissioners and 27,000 enumerators will be required. The time allowed for replies to starred questions is not such as to permit a detailed description of this procedure, but the house will be interested to hear that this is one of those not too common occurrences in which the present administration is following the same procedure as that followed in the 1951 census of Canada,


George James McIlraith: That is not right.
The hon. member went on to qualify it and said:
The present system of appointing a number of commissioners for each electoral district was one with which I had no association whatever.
The reason for that was that only one was appointed at that time rather than four. I am pointing out that in this relationship there was a good reason why it could not have been the same. One of the reasons was that at that time Liberal candidates had the unhappy faculty of getting elected most of the time and there were not so many candidates in the position in which we find some of them today.
We find that questions were asked and raised on three or four occasions. The hon. member for Port Arthur raised the matter on March 29. It was raised again on April 16 by the hon. member for Kootenay West. The question raised, and it has been confused, is that now there are four commissioners who are not really census takers but are responsible for the appointment of the census takers, and they will be in complete charge in a particular area, and they will be responsible for that area.
I should like to take a look at my own particular area by way of illustration. In fact, let us look at two areas with which I am quite familiar, namely my own riding of Timiskaming and the electoral district of Timmins. I hold in my hand a release of the list of census commissioners appointed, to be released at 8.00 a.m. on April 11, 1961. On page 16 we find reference to Timiskaming and the first commissioner is stated as being Mr. C. Foster Rice, Haileybury, Ontario. Mr. C. Foster Rice was the Conservative candidate in the last two federal elections. He is very interested in politics in my area and he is capable of operating a political machine, as he has proved on several occasions. By no
Supply-Trade and Commerce stretch of the imagination is he politically disinterested in the results of the census or in any other results in the riding of Timiskaming.
Reference is then made to Mr. James Aubrey Waterhouse, Elk Lake. Mr. Waterhouse has been Conservative organizer in that area for many years. He has great capabilities. I can visit Mr. Waterhouse before an election and find out within three votes how many votes I am going to get and how many votes all the other candidates are going to get. He knows exactly where they stand. He is by no means a disinterested political observer in my area.


Egan Chambers: He knows the district pretty well.


William Arnold Peters: He knows the district inside and out, and after he has finished this job he will know what everybody in that area earns, what they own and many other particulars.
Then there is Mr. George M. Hodgson of Englehart to whom reference is also made. I suggest the reason his name is there is that his wife is the president of the Timiskaming riding Conservative association. By no stretch of the imagination is he a disinterested and impartial observer of the political or economic scene in the riding of Timiskaming. Mr. James R. McDougall of Kirkland Lake who is mentioned next is and has been for many years connected with politics in an active way and cannot be declared to be an impartial observer of the political scene.


An hon. Member:: Did you recommend him?


William Arnold Peters: Obviously I did not recommend him. If I had been asked to do this I would have recommended people who are as impartial as possible.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


William Arnold Peters: Let hon. members not laugh because this is no laughing matter as far as I am concerned. The people of my riding are to be asked all these questions and I take violent exception to these political appointments being made for the obtaining of this information. I would suggest to anybody in Timiskaming who has any political sense at all that they do not answer any of these questions because the information will be used against them in a political way in the future. This information is advantageous to a political party for political reasons and there is not going to be the secrecy there should be with regard to the answers to the questions that are asked on this page. They are quite detailed and particular questions.
I suggest that no one should laugh at this matter. People of the greatest impartiality
4358	HOUSE OF
Supply-Trade and Commerce are required because it is essential that the answers to the questions be completely honest. Conservative members can laugh all they like. Canadians are going to have to spend a lot of money to conduct this census and I am sure they want to get the most impartial, accurate and complete picture possible. I suggest that anyone who gives information of this sort to some of these political hacks is stupid, and I do not believe the people of Timiskaming are stupid.
Let us take the riding of Timmins with which I am fairly familiar. The first names here are Mrs. Hilda Weir of Matheson and Mr. Charlie Shields of South Porcupine. I will not say anything about Mrs. Weir. If she had been listed under her husband's name I might have known her but I do not know her by her own first name and therefore am not going to comment. Mr. Charles M. Shields has been mayor of South Porcupine and a staunch Conservative for many years. He is in a position to know almost everybody in the area personally. He has been there for many years, and while I am not prepared to say that he has been closely enough connected with the operations of the Conservative party in that area to cause me much grief I am not quite sure that the same thing would be true of the hon. member for Timmins.
Mr. Thomas Gregory Carswell of Timmins is also a well known and outspoken Conservative. He has attended Conservative conventions in that area for many years. His family has been closely connected with the nomination of candidates and in my opinion he is in a position to make political use of this appointment.
The last name in area D is Mr. J. Emile Brunette. Again, who could be appointed from the Conservative party who would be closer to the political scene than J. Emile Brunette? He was not always a Conservative. He could have had this appointment as a Liberal because he ran as Liberal candidate several times and as the mayor of Timmins for several years was well known as a Liberal. However, in recent times of changing environment in the town of Timmins he became a Conservative and ran as a Conservative candidate in the last election against the sitting member for Timmins. Perhaps he might have been elected as a Liberal but after a person changes his party it is very difficult for him to be elected.
Each of these appointments has been a political one. I do not know what the government thinks about it. I do not know why the government should have done this. It is interesting to note that Mr. Grosart was in my area and disrupted the town council, probably resulting in the resignation of the


mayor of the town. Certainly there are going to be some other changes. Mr. Grosart made several important statements, but I suggest that the reason he was there was to talk to these people about the appointments that were to be made.
I suggest that if you check the Toronto papers you will find that in the last few days there has been speculation that there can be no by-elections in Ontario this year because the whole Conservative machine will be engaged in conducting the census and will not have the time to run by-elections. This is true in my part of the country although we do not need a by-election. Certainly looking at this list it is evident that the whole hierarchy of the Conservative party is engaged in the census.


John Alpheus Charlton: No, there are many more than that.


William Arnold Peters: I do not think so. In my riding we have the president, the candidate and two of the regional directors. There are only about four others and I presume they will be compensated by being appointed to take part in conducting the census. We will have the whole hierarchy in the area participating.
I am not questioning the ability of these people because they all have proven ability. All I am questioning is how you can obtain impartiality when you have people going around taking the census and politicking at the same time. Goodness knows, they are no different from us. We do not visit a dozen or two dozen homes without somebody inquiring about the situation in relation to the price of wheat or whatever the matter may happen to be.
These people will be politicking more than they will be taking the census. I say it is damned irresponsible of the government to try to conduct the census through the use of a political party machine. I agree entirely with the member for York-Scarborough that this is irresponsible. I do not think there could be anything more irresponsible than to use a political machine for this job. I would much rather have civil servants do the job. However, I think there are enough capable people who are sufficiently impartial that they would have no reason to divulge or to use the information obtained through this form. There are many people in my area who are impartial, even, surprisingly and unfortunately, with regard to politics. They are responsible people and they would be in a position to conduct the census. I am thinking of teachers who will not be engaged after the end of June, university students and other people who are unemployed.


John Alpheus Charlton: They are not unemployed.


William Arnold Peters: That is perhaps true. I stand corrected. They are not unemployed but they are not working at their normal jobs and are available to do this type of work. Many of the questions asked are very technical and complicated and teachers would probably have more success in having them answered than the plain ordinary politicians who will be conducting this survey in the ridings of Timiskaming and Timmins. If we are to be expected to permit these things to be done, then we are going to have to be given some assurance that there will be impartiality.
How many of my farmers are going to be asked a lot of pertinent questions about their farming operations? How many of them are going to like it if they know a political candidate is going to see all these figures and is going to know how they stand in relation to their business? We do not know, and it is just an assumption that the census is going to be completed as it has been completed in the past. I am strongly advocating, Mr. Chairman, that not only the people of Timiskaming but the people of Canada take a very close look at this matter before they answer any of these questions that are of a technical nature which have a bearing on their business or occupation. These answers could be used and will be used against them or for them, or at least if any political candidate wishes to use them they will be used because the answers will be observed by a political candidate.
I believe this government should be asked these questions which I put to this minister of the government through you, Mr. Chairman. Will you publish all this information? Will you take the names of the people and publish the information on a riding basis so that I can see what John Smith owns or how many cows John Smith has? Will you publish this so everyone can see this information? If you answer that you will not, then I suggest you have no right, in all decency, to allow this information to be seen and to be examined by people who are dedicated to a political party. I do not believe this is an unreasonable stand. I think we have a right to some impartiality in the commissioners. We are well aware of the fact that at the bottom level, that is the level at which the information is secured, there will be people who are interested in politics. I have no objection to that. However, I have great objection, Mr. Chairman, to this being done by those people who are in a position to use this material for political purposes.
I believe the Canadian people, and certainly the newspapers of this country, should be violently upset about this. The newspapers should request some type of protection for the Canadian people. Some of this information
Supply-Trade and Commerce
does not even appear in income tax forms. If it is going to be asked for, then the government will have to respect the secrecy. There should be an assurance given to the people that the government is not going to secure this information through the people it has appointed. I have suggested that the four commissioners appointed in my area are all political people, people who are not only conscious of politics-as we wish everybody to be -but are actively engaged in working with one political party. They have been appointed and are being paid as political patronage. This is wrong. I do not believe this situation is conducive to the judicious handling of the census and will not result in the full and reasonable disclosure of the business of each and every one of the Canadian people.
If there is to be impartiality, then I am sure the minister will get up and say he is sorry, that he did not go around and collect these people, but that the national organizer of his party did. He will say he disagrees with this practice and it should not be part of the political campaign for the next election, as it so obviously is. If the minister believes in obtaining these figures in an impartial manner, then I am sure he is going to stand up and say he disagrees with the appointment of these people if it can be proved that these facts are true.


George Harris Hees: I think we have just heard one of the most irresponsible statements heard in this chamber for a long time. This is the kind of speech you expect to hear in a place other than the parliament of Canada. I am rather shocked that the hon. member should have delivered such a speech. According to the hon. gentleman, you cannot trust anybody in his riding but him.
The people who have been chosen to carry out this most important task of taking the census are very highly respected people in all parts of the country, otherwise they would not have been chosen. They have been chosen on the basis, first of all of a good education; professional or business experience in a supervisory capacity; knowledge of the district; tact; good judgment and ability to deal with the people.
The hon. member has spoken about the matter of secrecy. If we can believe what he says, the information that these census takers have been gathering will be used only for their own information, for their own, personal gain. This is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard, and I have heard quite a few. This matter of secrecy is dealt with in the Statistics Act. I should like to quote from section 15 of that act, as follows:

Supply-Trade and Commerce
No individual return and no part of an individual return made, and no answer to any question put, for the purposes of this act, shall,... be published ...
It has been mentioned, too, that the census taker takes an oath of secrecy. An oath of secrecy is a very serious matter. It is not something people take lightly. The people who have been chosen are serious and respectable people, and when they take an oath of secrecy they are doing so in a very serious way.
I should like to mention the penalties that are imposed on any of those who are census takers and who break these regulations so far as secrecy is concerned. The penalties are outlined in section 34 of the Statistics Act as follows:
Every person employed in the execution of any duty under this act or any regulation who,
(a)	after having taken the prescribed oath, deserts from his duty, or wilfully makes any false declaration, statement or return touching any such matter;
(b)	in the pretended performance of his duties thereunder, obtains or seeks to obtain information that he is not duly authorized to obtain; or
(c)	fails to keep inviolate the secrecy of the information gathered or entered on the schedules and forms, and who, except as allowed by this act and the regulations, divulges the contents of any schedule or form filled in, in pursuance of this act or any regulation, or any information furnished in pursuance of this act or any regulation; is guilty of an offence and is liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding three hundred dollars, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to both fine and imprisonment.
I think I have outlined very clearly the qualifications of these people. I think I have made it clear that they have been chosen with great care. They are very highly respected people in their communities. They are given a very strict code of ethics to guide them in the performance of their duty. If any of them should not perform that duty properly, there are penalties prescribed. As I say, they are all required to take an oath of secrecy. People of the calibre of those who have been chosen to carry out this important task take an oath of secrecy as a serious matter.
I do not believe I have to deal with this matter any further, Mr. Chairman. I think the remarks of the hon. member were in extremely poor taste. I think the hon. member is casting a reflection, in a completely unjustified way, on the very fine people across this country who are going to be carrying out a very important task indeed. I can assure the hon. member and the people of Canada that in my view this census will be taken well and none of the things which dwell in his imagination will take place.
If there is any instance of anything of this kind taking place, there are very definite

rules, regulations and penalties prescribed for them. I very much hope that none of these penalties will be needed. I do not think they will.
I hope we will not again hear this kind of speech from the hon. member or any other hon. member. The hon. member's remarks were derogatory and unfair to those people who are chosen to carry out such an important task in the future.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make it very clear that I have no reason to cast any aspersions on any of these people.


An hon. Member:: Then don't do it.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Shut up then.


William Arnold Peters: If the aspersion is that they belong to a political party and are very actively engaged in that political party, then I make it.


Mr. McGee:: You made a specific allegation that these people will break their oath. The record will show that.


William Arnold Peters: I certainly make no allegation that they will break their oath.


George Harris Hees: You did.


William Arnold Peters: I said they would use this information and obviously they will. They will have to use it.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


William Arnold Peters: Let us not split hairs, Mr. Chairman. Let us make it really clear. I am not saying they are going to assemble all this information and use it as a report, or anything of that nature.
This is exactly what I am saying, that through this they are going to gain knowledge of certain things that many people would not tell them under other circumstances. If I am making any allegation, it is against the political party's organization that will set up this type of census machine.
My allegation is not against these people. I know many of them. I agree entirely with the minister that they are highly qualified, very capable people and they have integrity. I know all the people I mentioned in my riding and I have great respect for their ability. I also know that the information they get will be of some assistance to them, as it would be to anybody else, as even the published section of this document will be of value to each and every hon. member of this committee who takes the trouble to read the census in its general form.
I want to make it very clear that I do not cast aspersions on these people, but only on the system of appointment which allows

only one political party to be chosen in an area, and because this is the criterion of choice in that particular area.


Mr. Hodgson:: It is probably because nobody in the C.C.F. qualifies.


William Arnold Peters: I do not suggest that supporters of the C.C.F. be chosen either. I think there are many people who could be chosen. I have outlined one category of people who could be chosen for this work, which would not result in this type of action.
On previous occasions when the census was taken in my area, this was done. I very seldom, if ever, have to give credit to the Liberal party for being politically impartial; but so far as I know, this was done in the last census.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: You can say that again.


William Arnold Peters: This was done in the last census in my particular area. I know several of the people who were closely concerned with it, I do not know their political backgrounds, and I do not think this was the reason it was done. In spite of the assurance the minister has given, I still think some consideration should be given to this matter, and this census should not be one of the government's political patronage machines. This government has an excellent record of disposing of patronage. It has disposed of political patronage in many, many fields-I say this in all fairness-in which people previously enjoyed political patronage. I think this government is hurting itself as well as the operation of this census taking in pointing out to all the people across the country that political patronage is the basis upon which appointments are being made on this occasion.


Frank Charles McGee: Mr. Chairman, I wish to say a few words, just to clear the record, on the point the hon. member raised. The hon. member made specific allegations concerning certain persons in his district who have been appointed to these posts. I suggest to the hon. member-and perhaps some hon. members in this committee can give me guidance in this-that if he made that type of statement against these people outside the house, it would be libelous.
The minister read the specific terms of the oath, and the hon. member alleged that these people would take certain action with the information they obtained, which would be completely contrary to that oath. The hon. member has indulged in character assassination of individuals in his constituency and census takers across this country.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, in reply to the remarks of the hon. member, I note that this
Supply-Trade and Commerce kind of statement was made two or three days ago in this chamber by the same hon. member with probably no greater justification than today. I am quite happy to await the result of the record of the discussion today to ascertain what the situation is.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I just want to say a few words. I want to support a statement made by the hon. member for Timis-kaming. From experience in my own constituency I can say that in the appointment of census commissioners during the last election by that government there were members of two different political parties. Also, members of all parties were appointed, so far as I can recollect, as census enumerators. I think they were quite fair in that respect.
We have discovered the reason why no C.C.F. members have been appointed. The hon. member for the Ontario riding of Victoria frankly said that the government does not think they are qualified. I do not know whether the same applies to the Liberals. We can say definitely that the government does not think any of the C.C.F. party in Canada qualify to act as census commissioners. We had that fact established from the words of the hon. member.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: I did not say any such thing. I did not mention the government, or any government.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: You said "we".


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, if I may clear up this matter, as I heard it the hon. member for the Ontario riding of Victoria, said, "Probably no C.C.F. qualify".


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: No, he said "we".


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: I did not; I said "probably".


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I may have misheard, Mr. Chairman. However, in my constituency the census commissioners are all Conservatives, and they are excellent people; I know them all. But my point was this. First of all we have among Conservatives-who have brought this to my attention as well as others-and among members of other parties, persons who are capable, qualified and who could very well do with this $1,200 for six week's work.
This is our argument. It is not whether they should be Conservative, or what their politics should be. For instance, in my constituency two of the gentlemen appointed- they are excellent persons; I know them well; they are highly respected-are members of one of the most successful legal firms in the district. But there are, shall I say qualified and competent Conservatives who would just love to have the opportunity to supplement

Supply-Trade and Commerce their income, which in many cases is very small at the present time, by $1,200 for six week's work.
As the hon. member for Timiskaming said, the government can be given credit in many quarters for its opposition to the practice of patronage. The former minister of public works was an excellent example. One knows the pressure which is exerted. We are all human, and after a party has been out of power for 20 years it is quite human to get your own friends into these positions where possible.
Under normal circumstances this would possibly not draw so much criticism, but under the present circumstances, when there are people who need this extra bit of work both as census commissioners and census enumerators, I say we have to look at it as Canadians and not as partisans.
My concluding words are that I do hope the census commissioners will be instructed to appoint as enumerators capable, competent persons, regardless of politics, who need this extra income during these very difficult times.


Mr. Thomas:: I think this is an opportune time for the Minister of Trade and Commerce to assure the members of this committee and thus the people of Canada that the information to be gathered during the course of the census will not and cannot be used for the purpose of computing income tax. There have been some fears expressed along those lines by the people in my area and I believe that any assurance which can be given by the minister and by the government, and strongly emphasized throughout this country, would have the effect of reassuring the people when the census enumerators come around to gather information.


George Harris Hees: I am glad to assure the hon. member and other members of this committee that the information deriving from the taking of the census cannot be used for income tax purposes or for the enforcement of any law or bylaw. This information is strictly for use of the dominion bureau of statistics.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I have one question to ask. Is it not true that recourse is had to this information for the purpose of ascertaining the date of birth for the purpose of old age pension payments, for example, if no other means is available?


George Harris Hees: I am advised that individuals can have access to the record of their birth date, but nobody else.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think the minister will not mind my correcting him by saying that where an individual applies, say,


for an old age pension and there is some dispute as to age, the old age security division of the Department of National Health and Welfare exercises the right which it has under the statute, on assigned authority, to examine the records of the bureau for the purpose of obtaining information as to the age of the applicant.


George Harris Hees: I think that is, in effect, what I said.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The minister must not resent my helping him.


George Harris Hees: I always welcome help from the hon. member for Essex East. Information as to a person's own birth date can be given to him or to somebody else on his signature.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National energy board-
401. Administration, $544,970.
William Howell Arthur Thomas: On item 401, I have recommended action on other occasions to permit the amendment of the National Energy Board Act by incorporating in it section 273 of the Railway Act. When the National Energy Board Act was passed in 1959, section 273 of the Railway Act was omitted. The National Energy Board Act includes sections 207 to 246 and section 248 of the Railway Act but section 273 was omitted. The sections of the Railway Act which were included in the National Energy Board Act deal with the acquisition and expropriation of land for purposes of right of way.
The amendment would make pipe lines at present under federal charter subject to provincial drainage laws in the same way as pipe lines which operate under provincial charter. Pipe lines involved in municipal drainage schemes would be treated like those of any other property owner, being subject to assessment and so on. Their owners would enjoy the right of appeal to the courts if they wish to have such assessments adjusted. Owners of pipe lines would be made responsible for any added cost to a municipal drainage scheme caused by their presence or operations.
The provisions which are requested to be incorporated in the Railway Act would be of great assistance to individual farmers and municipal drainage schemes especially in the area of southwestern Ontario which I represent. This proposal to include section 273 of the Railway Act in the National Energy Board Act came to me from the drainage engineering firm of Archibald, Gray and McKay of London on behalf of the township of Adelaide. This request has been endorsed by the association of Ontario land surveyors,

by the Middlesex county council, by the Ontario minister of highways acting in his capacity as chairman of the special committee of the Ontario legislature which was set up to inquire into expropriation proceedings for land in Ontario, by the township of East Williams, by the Ontario federation of agriculture and by the township of London, Middlesex county.
I intend to let one or two of these endorsers argue the case for me. The association of Ontario land suveyors at its meeting held in Hamilton on February 15, 16 and 17, 1960 passed a resolution endorsing this proposal. May I say that this association is an important body whose members undertake the engineering in connection with most of the drainage work carried on in the province of Ontario. I intend to read an excerpt from the report of this annual meeting. It refers to a question which is the second of a series of questions placed before the meeting for endorsation by the drainage committee of the association. The excerpt reads as follows:


Mr.   Stidwell@: The second question is rather
involved, and I shall try to explain the question before I read it. Under subsection 22 of section 8 of the Municipal Drainage Act, public utilities are responsible for the increased cost of drainage work caused by the construction and operation of such public utilities. There is some doubt as to the application of this subsection where a public utility holds a dominion charter. Railways were made responsible for the increased cost of a drain caused by the operation of the railway company by an amendment to the Railway Act early in the twentieth century-see section 273 of the Railway Act. Recently we have had a number of oil pipe lines and gas pipe lines constructed across our province, and a number of these pipe line companies operate under a dominion charter. So we are up against the problem: are these companies responsible for the additional costs of drainage work caused by their operations? Certain sections of the Railway Act were incorporated in the Pipe Lines Act, but this all important section 273, which made the railway companies liable for the increased cost in drainage work, was omitted. Last fall the National Energy Board Act was passed, and section 71, subsection 1 of that act. incorporates sections 207-246, and also section 248, of the Railway Act but this all important section 273 was left out.
The question now is: "Should section 71, subsection 1, of the National Energy Board Act be amended by the addition of section 273 of the Railway Act to read-'Sections 207-246, 248 and 273 of the Railway Act'; in other words should these pipe line companies be responsible for the increased costs to drainage work caused by their operation?" The committee's answer to this question is: "Yes". And we would recommend that this association go on record as being in favour of this amendment to the existing legislation. I move the adoption of the committee's answer to this report with this request.
Later that report was adopted at the annual meeting of the Ontario association of land surveyors.
In addition to that I would like to read a letter directed to the former minister of trade
4, 1961
Supply-Trade and Commerce and commerce, now Minister of Veterans Affairs, written by Honourable F. M. Cass, the minister of highways for Ontario. This letter is dated August 22, 1960 and reads as follows:
At the last session of the legislature of Ontario a select committee was appointed to investigate and inquire into the laws of expropriation in this province. I have had the privilege of being appointed chairman of the select committee and it is in that capacity that I wish to bring to your attention a problem which was placed before the select committee.
I am advised that a submission has been made to you by W. H. A. Thomas, Esq. the member of parliament for Middlesex West, requesting that the National Energy Board Act be amended so as to make section 273 of the Railway Act of Canada applicable to pipe line companies incorporated under the provisions of federal legislation. As you are probably already aware, the above mentioned section of the Railway Act would make the pipe line companies responsible for any interference with drainage in the provinces as are any railways, public utilities or other such bodies; the problem would appear to be so reasonable that one would almost think that the omission was accidental rather than intentional. The interference which may be created in both municipal and provincial drainage schemes by the construction of a pipe line is very serious and can in certain circumstances cause great expense to both local land owners and the ratepayers of the province.
On behalf of the select committee may I urgently request that this proposed amendment receive your favourable consideration and, ultimately, submission to parliament for its consideration.
We have the anomalous situation in Middlesex West of four pipe lines crossing the riding, three operating under Ontario provincial charter and one under national charter. In respect of the three, when a farm or municipal drain has to be carried across the pipe line the pipe line company is compelled to pay the cost of such crossing. However, in respect of the fourth, which operates under federal charter, the pipe line company does not have to pay for the crossing. The practice of the national energy board has been to award these crossing permits with the expense to be borne by the municipal drainage authority. I should mention that costs of drainage crossings have run as high as $7,000 to $8,000 each. I would suggest that it is unreasonable to have pipe lines in one area operating under similar conditions treated in different ways.
Without taking any more time I would urge upon the minister the necessity for expedition in the consideration which is now being given this matter by the national energy board, and would suggest that an amendment be made to the National Energy Board Act incorporating section 273 of the Railway Act.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, I can assure the hon. member that I will report his suggestions to the energy board members, two of whom are sitting with me now, and that I will give more attention to this matter than is being given to it at the present time.

Supply-Trade and Commerce Mr. Chairman, may I also take this opportunity of seeking permission to place on the records of Hansard a table showing the comparative sales of salted cod which the hon. member for Bonavista-Twilingate requested earlier this afternoon?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I am very grateful to the minister for having this prepared so expeditiously and for his cour-

tesy in letting me have an extra copy of it. I am sure it will be very helpful.


Jacques Flynn: Does the committee consent to having this document printed at this point in the proceedings?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The table above referred to is as follows: ]
Stocks of salted cod as of March 31st, 1961, are as follows:
wet salted cod	 14,485,000 lbs.
dried salted cod	 14.919,000 lbs.
Exports of salted cod in calendar years 1958, 1959, and 1960 were:
Wet salted cod (over 45 per cent moisture content)
1958	1959	1960Quantity Value	Quantity Value	Quantity Valuelbs.	$	lbs.	$	lbs.	s2,524,000	246,000	4,713,000	412,000-	-	5,122,000	408,000	4,473,000	467,000TJ.S.A	. 4,188,000	481,000	4,135,000	483,000	3,163,000	572,000Other	. 272,000	36,000	1,526,000	133,000	1,356,000	124,000Total	. 4,460,000	517,000	13,307,000	1,270,000	13,705,000	1,575,000Dried salted	cod (under 45	per cent moisture content)	Barbados	. 2,084,000	294,000	1,888,000	267,000	1,931,000	293,000Jamaica	. 13,048,000	2,125,000	15,096,000	2,532,000	15,394,000	2,484,000Trinidad and Tobago	. 3,996,000	664,000	2,994,000	514,000	2,960,000	537,000Leeward and Windward. ..	. 3,427,000	497,000	3,248,000	498,000	3,594,000	569,000. 1,718,000	308,000	2,366,000	522,000	126,000	22,000Cuba	. 10,648,000	1,867,000	12,291,000	2,307,000	8,323,000	1,573,000. 1,300,000	252,000	740,000	152,000	865,000	184,000Italy	. 4,082,000	763,000	4,397,000	688,000	2,104,000	411,000Portugal	.. 3,374,000	527,000	2,422,000	442,000	2,046,000	373,000Panama	. 1,057,000	215,000	284,000	58,000	359,000	75,000Spain	.. 5,283,000	918,000	1,236,000	222,000	4,681,000	839,000Puerto Rico	.. 24,744,000	3,571,000	13,825,000	2,114,000	18,604,000	2,953,000.. 3,956,000	735,000	4,037,000	776,000	3,771,000	752,000Other	.. 1,633,000	268,000	1,565,000	245,000	1,032,000	181,000Total	.. 80,350,000	13,004,000	66,389,000	11,337,000	65,790,000	11,246,000


Mr. Smith (Calgary South):: Mr. Chairman, I should like to take a moment of the committee's time to say a word about the energy board itself. I should like to congratulate the members of that board and the chairman, as well as its staff, for the manner in which they have carried out their function since the board's establishment. Their success is certainly a great credit to themselves and to the system which was introduced in the establishing of the National Energy Board Act. I know that all hon. members of the committee, as well as members of the petroleum industry and consumer alike, agree that this has been a very successful operation.
I am sure the minister is aware that in a very short time the term of office of the

present chairman of the board will expire. I believe that office of the present incumbent carries a two year term. I do not suggest that the other members of the board are not capable of replacing the present chairman but, in the interest of the board and in view of the chairman's past experience, I suggest it would be desirable that the government negotiate with the province of Alberta so that Mr. McKinnon's appointment can be extended for another two year period. I realize that there are difficulties in this connection but I am sure the members of the board would be the first to concur that this would be a good step.
I would like to say a word about the national oil and gas policy which is adminis-

tered by the board. I had the privilege in 1957 of expressing in this house the hope that I would some day see the establishment of a national oil and gas policy, and the development of a program which would encourage the industry to voluntarily correct its own problems by increasing the domestic and foreign markets for Canadian crude oil. This government's administration in this regard adopted the lesser of two severe policies, on the one hand to take no action at all and allow the industry to find its own level, or to establish fairly severe control for imports of oil. While I have always advocated the eventual construction of a pipe line, I nevertheless agree that the course followed by the board in introducing a voluntary program is more appropriately suited to the present need. As has been pointed out, this program will provide a level of production, in terms of barrels that the construction of a pipe line would produce in the two year period yet to elapse.
What I do ask the minister and the chairman of the energy board, however, is that when they are making assessments in the future for targets beyond 1963, they make the calculations well in advance based on the returns of oil company refineries. We should keep in mind the factor of growth which is going to be substantial; for I am inclined to believe that while the present policy has been a sound one the targets were perhaps a bit low. Nevertheless there is no question that the policy as such has provided tremendous benefits to the industry, first of all by providing orderly regulation of oil production in the producing areas by establishing, of course, firm contracts for the marketing of oil not only in Canada but in terms of United States markets as well.
It has been said in this house and outside that to some degree this policy is going to be dependent on our success in moving oil into the United States. I hope that this is not entirely true, but quite obviously if the policy is to be successful it will have to work on the assumption that we are going to be able to sell more oil in the Ontario market and thus replace crude oil from foreign sources. I am happy to be able to say that indications are that the Ontario market has shown the largest increase we have seen for some time, an increase of 20,000 barrels a day over the same period one year ago.
What is also particularly significant is that many people who said that this policy could not work now agree that it is not only going to work but it has already proved successful in terms of total production. The first six months indicate there is no doubt that the target will be reached. In fact we are not too far off the total target for the year.
Supply-Trade and Commerce Therefore, I say to the minister that he and his colleagues should be congratulated on introducing a policy which in the long run is going to assist the industry. I say to him that in making assessments for the future, in so far as targets are concerned, we must be absolutely certain that we relate the total targets to the development of the industry and that we do not in any way underestimate this development and thus make the targets for the future too low.
The other point I should like to make is that there are a number of areas which concern the government's relation to the petroleum and natural gas industry. In the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys we have a very effective geological survey. The Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources administers legislation and regulations relating to Canadian oil and gas. I will argue, as I have done before, that in this parliament we should attempt to put all of these matters having to do with hydrocarbons, in fact all of the energy sources, under one department and one administration to avoid duplication of effort and to be able to build up a staff which can adequately look after the problems related to the industry, because I know some of the difficulties in obtaining staff for the national energy board and, of course, for the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. I would hope that some day we shall see the national energy board having authority over the Canada oil and gas regulations; for it would only seem logical that this phase of the oil development program should come under one particular division.
I wish to make it very clear that I am not suggesting any minister of the crown have the responsibility for all of this; I am merely saying that we should give some thought to taking all the segments of the petroleum and gas industry and putting them under a single responsibility, as has been done in a great many countries similar to Canada.
Finally, may I say to the minister and to the board that I am certain when the minister expresses his belief that this policy could work he should nevertheless emphasize that if the targets are not reached the government will have no other course but to, as I understand it, implement section 87 of the energy board authority. This is indeed assurance enough to the petroleum industry and the people of Canada as a whole that the government intends to make its policy work and in this we congratulate the minister and wish him every success.


Mr. Broome:: I wish to take about one minute to reinforce many of the points made by

Supply-Northern Affairs the hon. member for Calgary South and also to say how much we owe the minister for having taken a firm stand in regard to quotas set for the oil and gas industry. I think the results that have been produced occurred only because the industry knew that the minister was not fooling and that they were going to reach those targets or quotas would be imposed. It was only when they came to that conclusion that they started to give the co-operation that has been evident and has resulted in such a major increase in oil production in Canada.
The minister deserves the highest credit for having made the position of the government crystal clear in this regard and for having gained the co-operation of the industry to the end that we would get a fair share of our own market and have exports to compensate in some small way for the imports which we are accepting.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Jacques Flynn: This completes the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce. We shall now turn to the estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources.



DEPARTMENT OF NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL RESOURCES

[Stage Direction]
279. Departmental administration including Canada's share of the expenses of the "resources for tomorrow" conference, $1,105,390.
Jacques Flynn: This item will be found on page 57 of the blue book, and the details on page 398.
(Translation):


Mr. Regnier:: Mr. Chairman, on April 21, I think it was, I was just on the point of quoting an excerpt from the fifth volume pubished by the Societe historique de Saint-Boniface when the chairman called it five o'clock.
I am speaking in French tonight because the other day, the brief remarks I made in English were ascribed to the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam (Mr. Regier) and since the hon. member speaks only one language, I do not think there will be any mistake this time.
The excerpt I wanted to quote the other day-it is on page 29 of volume 5 which I have just mentioned-was from a letter written by Msgr. Tache, then bishop of St. Boniface. In that letter, Bishop Tache refers to the building which had been constructed before 1846 for the reception of the Grey Nuns. Here is what Bishop Tache had to say:
The deeply Christian families of St. Boniface find satisfaction in the fact that their daughters enjoy educational facilities similar to those available to their sons.
IMr. Broome.]
The Sisters of Charity, or Grey Nuns, operate a school for girls in St. Boniface: by a special Providence, those devoted nuns were able to erect a large and beautiful building entirely for educational purposes.
They have a boarding school and a day school, and they train teachers in their normal school; 18 nuns are full-time teachers and 300 children attend the classes.
Our laws on education, so sound and in keeping with the real sense of freedom, promote the Christian education of our young people.
This is what Bishop Tache could say in 1888 about our education laws. Unfortunately, the situation has changed a great deal since 1890, but I believe that one day the education system in Manitoba will be restored to what it was in 1888.
Referring in his letter to charitable works, Bishop Tache mentioned this:
Charitable activities cannot be wanting wherever there are Sisters of Charity.
The old building, birthplace of those organizations in St. Boniface, is still the same one which was erected by Msgr. Provencher. It is Vicarial House in which the novitiate is located and around which eventually were built an orphanage, a home for disabled women and a hospital.
Now, this house, already described as an old one in 1888 by Bishop Tache, is I believe the oldest house in western Canada. It is located on Tache street in St. Boniface.
I am happy to learn that the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources is giving earnest attention to this historic building. I understand certain amounts will be voted for its preservation.
The house has been entrusted to a museum committee in St. Boniface. I am not sure, but I also think that the city of St. Boniface is prepared to vote a substantial amount for the conversion of this house into a museum, and for its maintenance.
I hope the government of the province of Manitoba will do likewise so as to help preserve this historic building.
I believe that monuments and museums are important to keep alive the history of a nation.
In my view, the history of the province of Manitoba ranks with that of any other area in America. We remember that La Verendrye in 1735, had already travelled over most of the territory of the prairies. We know that settlers who came over from Scotland in 1812, 1813 and 1815 developed that area.
Manitoba has many historians, for example, Father Dugas, one Mr. Tasse, Alexander Ross, Joseph James Hargrave, Donald Gunn, Alexander Begg, George Bryce, R. B. Hill, F. H. Schofield, Miss Margaret McWilliams and Mr. W. L. Morton, a professor at the university.

Apart from the historical society of St. Boniface, I think there is in Winnipeg an historical society which also has been interested in the history of the province of Manitoba.
Mr. Chairman, I think it is most important for the citizens of the province of Manitoba, as well as for all Canadians, to have some knowledge of the history of the province of Manitoba. In fact, if the history of that province were better known to Canadians, it would be easier to maintain harmony in this country.
When those hardy Scotch pioneers came to Canada, they stopped at York Factory, in the fall of 1811. They were able to spend the winter there before proceeding on their trip to the Red river which they reached only the following autumn.
Since winter was too cold and food was lacking, they had to establish quarters 70 miles south of Red river, in the village of Pembina, where the population was almost exclusively French Metis. In order to survive, those Scotch settlers had, on three occasions, to seek shelter with those French Metis of Pembina. However, one year there was a shortage of food even in that village and all the settlers, men, women and children alike, had to make for the prairies, in the snow, so as to try to find a group of Metis hunters who might provide them with shelter and food.
That is what those pioneers did.
I might add that one year there was so much snow that horses could not be used on the prairies, the buffaloes had wandered away and the people of Pembina village could not survive. They, in turn, had to seek food from the Scotch pioneers who, having become farmers, had managed to keep enough wheat and flour to save the other settlement from starvation.
This lesson from history proves that people need one another and that if the descendants of those Scotch pioneers are still living today, it is thanks to the help their forefathers received from the people of those villages who numbered about 500 in 1821. It is true that the Scottish pioneers were somewhat less numerous but, by helping one another they managed to beat the great poverty and depression that prevailed in those days.
Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to dwell overlong on that subject. I simply wish to thank the minister for what he has already done and urge him to solve the problem, to try to obtain for the citizens of St. Boni-
Supply-Northern Affairs face that house where we may preserve, before they are all lost, the historical records we now have in our possession.
Mr. Chairman, while there have been many historians of that period it may be pointed out also that there was a poet by the name of Pierre Falcon, who once lived in Pembina and who later moved to a place called While Horse Plains, which in 1824 became St. Frangois-Xavier.
That poet wrote songs on all the great historic events that took place in the province at that time. I therefore feel that someday we might consider erecting a monument to that first poet of western Canada.
(Text):


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I should like to join the hon. member for St. Boniface in his appeal to the minister for the aid of the historic sites and monuments board and the other facilities of his department in the preservation of the relics of the early history of the Canadian west before it was even Canadian. I do so with a certain amount of local pride. As an old schoolboy of Tache high school in St. Boniface, I know these places very well. I know, I think, every alley and every street in that oldest city west of the lakes. There is so much there that is worth preserving and that is a monument of the fact that, after some initial difficulty, we have developed in that community a bonne entente which has not only been very satisfactory in that community but which has resulted in the production from that community of some of the most talented people in the French language in all Canada today.
Indeed, I would go so far as to say, if it would not be regarded as too boastful coming from one who spent 30 years of his life in Manitoba, that perhaps the French speaking inhabitants of Manitoba, in proportion to their numbers in this generation, have produced a disproportionately large number of remarkable and distinguished people in the arts and letters of this country. Of course, one thinks particularly of Gabrielle Roy, of Gisele MacKenzie, in another field, and of her brother who is now distinguishing himself as well. One could go on, of course, and add to this list.


Walter Franklyn Matthews: Get down to the P's.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am afraid that I would not be able to qualify on the grounds of racial origin, but that does not alter the fact that it is, for me, a matter of local pride.
While I am on my feet, I should like to remind the new minister of something of which I reminded his predecessor without any success. I can say, sir, that I should have liked to do this when the hon. member for

Supply-Northern Affairs Cape Breton North and Victoria was not in the chamber, but he is here. I should like to go on and remind hon. members that the very beginning of our whole country was in the constituency that I represent. It does seem to me that the time has come to commemorate, in a proper way, the landfall of the discoverer of Canada, John Cabot, at Cape Bonavista, on St. John's day in 1497.
I suggest to the minister it would also be most appropriate to commemorate the fact that that later explorer of Canada, that mariner from St. Malo, Jacques Cartier, following a generation later in the wake of John Cabot, made his first landfall at Cape Bonavista. Before he went to Gaspe and long before he went to Quebec, Cartier trod the soil of Newfoundland.
This fact should be commemorated as part of our history, as is the case in any part of this country where the historic sites and monuments board or the historic section of the national parks board, commemorate these things. It not only has a cultural value, but it also has a very practical, hard material value. The commemoration of these ancient monuments is one of the greatest of the many current attractions in this country. The more we mark these sites, the more we advertise them, the more we can hope to make our country interesting and attractive, not merely to our own people who travel about but also to those who come to visit us from other countries.
I might point out to the minister that since a national park was established in Newfoundland by the previous administration, the present government has made great improvements there for which I am grateful. I would emphasize to the minister the fact that, in a sense, this gratitude is a lively anticipation of future improvements because only the surface has been scratched. This national park has resulted in the completion of the road right across the whole of Newfoundland. Gander, on one side of that park, is the crossroads of the whole world and Bonavista, on the other side of the park, is the site of the beginning of the history of North America. What would be more fitting than that tours should be arranged for those people who are held up in Gander. It is only 100 miles across the park to Bonavista where one finds the most beautiful scenery, I was going to say in all North America, but at any rate east of the rockies.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Whitney Pickersgill: If any hon. member doubts the complete accuracy of that statement, let him go and see for himself. If he is so blind as to disagree with me, then I shall have to assume that each of us has not the same appreciation of beauty. I do not believe that
[Mr. Pickersglll.l
many would disagree if they had that experience. I admit the road is not the best in the world. Indeed, I can assure the minister that it is not, but that, too, will be taken care of in time.
I understand the Italian government is interested in this project. We in this country should never forget that in recent times among the most productive and most useful of our groups of new citizens have been those from Italy, or that the man who found Canada in the first place, the man who started Canada as an extension of Europe, was Giovanni Caboto, of Venice and Bristol.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 7.30 p.m.
Jacques Flynn: Shall vote 279 carry?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I did have one or two other things I wanted to say on a rather different subject, but I wonder whether the minister would first like to make some observations about the points raised by myself and the hon. member for St. Boniface.


Mr. Dinsdale:: Mr. Chairman, we have had several speakers on the first item. At this time, if it meets the wishes of the committee, we might allow all hon. members to make their presentations and then I will make a general reply.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, I do not think I have anything more that you could properly call a speech. I do want to ask the minister one or two questions on the administrative item, but I think perhaps I should desist from doing that until any other hon. member who wishes to speak in a general way has had an opportunity to do so.
(Translation):


Mr. English:: Mr. Chairman, I listened with close attention this afternoon to the hon. member for St. Boniface (Mr. Regnier) and the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill).
The latter referred to Jacques Cartier and suggested that he first landed in Newfoundland. At first I had some doubts, but having later done some research in my office, I have found that he actually did set foot in Newfoundland, although the exact spot is not mentioned.
The French explorer Jacques Cartier made his first trip to Canada in April 1534. We find in his memoirs the first fragments of Cana-

dian history. After a brief stop for fresh water somewhere along the north shore of the St. Lawrence-and I am prepared to believe the hon. member for Bonavista-Twil-lingate, because I seem to have read somewhere that it might have been in Newfoundland-he sailed in a southwesterly direction, along the Magdalen islands and Prince Edward Island, and finally stopped on the shores of the Baie de Chaleur, though historians have never determined the exact location. The presence of seemingly hostile Indians prevented him from landing, however, and Cartier's narrative indicates that his ships turned back toward the north on July 12. On July 24, they entered another deep bay, and Cartier thought it was the basin through which the St. Lawrence flowed into the sea; he thought it was the road to Cathay. Having gone ashore to explore the area, he realized his mistake. He now felt certain he had just discovered a new continent. So he had his men build a wooden cross 30 feet high, bearing a shield with an engraved fleur-de-lis and the words "Vive le roi de France" written in large gothic script. Here is how Cartier himself describes the scene in the French language of the time:
On the XXIII day of said month, we built a cross 30 feet in height, which was constructed in the presence of a large number of them on the cape at the entrance to the said cove. Under the cross-arm of that cross we put a shield in relief bearing three fleurs-de-lis, and on the cross we put a wooden sign bearing the words LONG LIVE THE KING OF FRANCE. And the said cross we set up on the said cape before them while they watched us make it and set it up. After it was raised, we all fell to our knees with clasped hands adoring it in their presence, and making signs at them, looking at the cross and pointing to the sky, to signify to them that said cross was the sign of our redemption, at what they expressed much admiration, turning to look at the said cross.
It is regrettable that that cross was not made of material more durable than wood, because, soon after, it was destroyed by the elements. The actual location where that cross was erected is not known even today. It is however admitted by all historians that it was on the shores of what we now call the bay of Gaspe. The place which seems to best meet the descriptions of this event and on which many of our earlier historians agree, is now called Peninsula point, a small headland with sandy beaches which juts out at the mouth of the bay of Gaspe. Any navigator would probably choose this place to rest before venturing further into these unknown and unexplored lands.
The erection of this cross is a memorable event. To all those who want to keep an historical souvenir of this country's origins and
Supply[DOT]-Northern Affairs who hope to see the writing of a history enriched with glorious events, Cartier's gesture marks a starting point. The great cross set up by the French navigator when he discovered our country was soon buried in the sand, but the memory of the moving ceremony that took place in the imposing scenery of the verdant forest under a blue sky will always remain vivid in the minds of Canadians. It was one of the most sublime moments of all our history. And in a developing country such as ours, it is an inheritance that all generations must cherish jealously.
We should not be ashamed to show devotion for our origins, because a nation is not founded only on material things. And to forget those gestures of the past, or still to deprive Canadians of this worthy heritage of history, is to hold our birthright in contempt.
In the years between 1534 and 1625, when France was trying to colonize this new land, the bay of Gaspe was often mentioned in the memoirs and writings of the time as a mooring place for ships from foreign countries.
After their hazardous crossing of the Atlantic in their frail crafts, the captains of yore headed for the bay of Gaspe, where the crew traded various items with the Indians for food and water.
Once the crew was rested, the ship weighed anchor and, from Gaspe headed for Quebec or Montreal.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Would the hon. member tell us where he got his information?


Roland Léo English: These are facts I picked up in various books and also obtained from historians who were doing research work in Gaspe, and they let me have reports on well established facts. That is why I dare quote them, because I want to inform the house as accurately as possible of some details which sometimes are rather complex and difficult to establish. Of course, I want to avoid errors. I am therefore quoting, if I may, details gathered here and there.
Thus, in the very beginning of our history, Gaspe constantly played an important part in the first attempts at colonization of this new continent.
Indeed, it has been mentioned that the greatest naval battle of our history was fought in the bay of Gaspe. That same battle had forced Champlain to surrender Quebec
4370	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs to the British, in 1629, and certainly did contribute to change the course of Canadian history.
Mr. Chairman, there are several other historic events connected with the Gaspe peninsula.
Alas, that part of our homeland, which is legendary and basic to our history, has been too much neglected until today.
I very well remember that at the little rural school I attended as a boy, we used to study Canadian history in a textbook in which could be found the following words written under a photo:
Gaspe, Jacques Cartier. Cartier plants a cross. There was also this inscription:
Long live the King of France.
What I find strange today is the fact that we are questioning the actual place where Cartier landed.
Mr. Chairman, all those who have studied their history and who want to recognize that part of their province for what it is really worth, admit that it was actually in Gaspe that Jacques Cartier landed.
There are also several other historic facts I should like to point out. Among those, there is the one where it is said that later, in the course of our history, the British army, under General Wolfe, encamped at Gaspe before capturing Quebec for the second time in 1759. On September 4, 1758, Wolfe arrived there with seven ships and three infantry regiments numbering 1,500 men. Those soldiers settled on the wide and triangular belts of sand of Peninsula point: the historic site where, in all likelihood, Cartier landed in 1534.
The proof of this occupancy is provided by a painting of Captain Hervey Smith who served as aide-de-camp to General Wolfe on that trip. The painting shows the exact location of buildings in that group, including the two-storey building known as the Customs house, where Wolfe lived during his stay in Gaspe. An important historical fact is that the location of General Wolfe's house was determined accurately by the late Fred Richmond, of Gaspe, who discovered the remains of a fireplace at the exact spot indicated on Captain Smith's painting.
Several of the relics buried at that place indicate that the station was inhabited in the past by French traders. A coin found on the site of the "Maison des Douanes" was a gold piece clearly bearing the date 1693.


Three two-sou pieces from 1629, or even from 1575, were also found on this spot.
Mr. Chairman, I could relate many other legendary facts, but I would not want to take too much of the time of the house. I might have another opportunity to speak on it at length.
But, as a son of Gaspe, and as the representative of Gaspe, I am proud of this part of our province.
And I also take pride in proclaiming in this house that Gaspe has made a major contribution to our history.
When, every summer, I see many tourists come to visit the Gaspe peninsula, to see for themselves what they have learned in their history books, who are filled with admiration by the scenic beauty of a site such as Perce, I wonder if each and everyone of us, rising above political considerations, should not acknowledge at least inwardly, if we do not want to express this feeling outwardly, that we have too long neglected and ignored that part of our province which is called Gaspe.
To think that after all these years, we do not even have a historic park in Gaspe that displays all these marvels.
Every summer, I meet people in my riding, members of the Catholic clergy, the bishop of Gaspe, Protestant ministers, and I am glad to note that there exists full cooperation between these various groups.
In my part of the country there is no class, racial or religious discrimination.
The town of Gaspe has a population equally comprised of French and English Canadians. The parish of Douglastown is entirely Irish. Not a word of French is heard there. The parish of Barachois is also English speaking.
And yet, each and everyone of us is working in harmony, because we are all proud of our history, and our hearts are filled with love for the Gaspe peninsula, our province and our beloved country, Canada.
Mr. Chairman, that is why-no matter what may be thought by those who feel I am delaying the adoption of the estimates-I considered it my duty to express the voice of Gaspe for in 1957, the people of that area put their confidence in me, regardless of political considerations, because they examined my record and knew my attachment for the Gaspe land. The confidence they put in me indicates that they wanted me to come here to Ottawa, not only to listen to debates, but.

Supply-Northern Affairs
to uphold their rights and work in the in- party, may come down into this small sec-terest of that part of the population which tion of my province and visit an historic park was unfortunately so long ignored by every that would remind them of the feats of arms political administration.	of our history.
Mr. Chairman, I hope that what I am saying now will not be in vain but that it will bring results. My duty as a member is not to come to this House of Commons and accept everything without saying a word; I feel I am entitled to obtain for that part of the Gaspe peninsula what it has a right to expect.
The population of the Gaspe peninsula has always contributed to the progress of Canada. People in my riding have always contributed money and taxes toward the development of our country, but I would like to see part of this money used for the development of this part of Quebec which is assuredly one of the most beautiful in Quebec and even in Canada.
Mr. Chairman, if we are rightly asking for a historic park in the Gaspe peninsula it is not because the humble member for Gaspe requests it but because the history of our country demands it.
I hope that the request I am making tonight will be granted. I know the devotion to duty of the minister and I am convinced that he will do all he can. I hope I may never receive an answer such as was given to me once to the effect that it was not sure that Cartier had landed in Gaspe. If the person who sent me this letter would care to meet me, I would gladly give him a lesson in history. If that is the reason advanced for not accepting to plan a historic site in Gaspe, I do not accept it. If some one answers that it is not certain that Cartier ever landed at Gaspe, I do not accept that. It is my privilege not to do so.
If you only knew how many hours and how many years I have spent studying Gas-pesia and its history. I have been a professor in Quebec for ten years and I like to think that the history I taught my pupils was not false history, as some people claim. Anyhow unless I am given proof to the contrary, I am going to continue to teach that splendid history.
Mr. Chairman, I want to apologize, perhaps I have been a bit too long. No matter how long my political career might last, how many years or days I might spend here in Ottawa, I would like people to say after I am gone, after I have left Ottawa, that at least I have made known my Gaspesia, that I have claimed what it has a right to expect from our government and that I have accomplished my duty. That is the only reward I am expecting from politics.
I do hope that an agreement be reached, so that all the hon. members, whatever their


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Would the hon. member permit me a question? He said that in his opinion Gaspe had been neglected. Could he tell us if it is true that for many years he was a deputy minister in the Union Nationale government?


Roland Léo English: Mr. Chairman, I am glad that question was put to me. I am not in the habit of indulging in petty politics or trying to make political capital with such a matter. I leave such pettiness to the hon. member who asked the question.
But since he has started the ball rolling, it is a pleasure for me to reply.
I was a deputy minister in the Union National government. As a matter of fact, I was a candidate in 1935; I was then 24.
If you insist on having my pedigree, I shall be pleased to oblige. I was secretary to the minister of mines and fisheries, from 1936 to 1939. I was appointed deputy minister in 1953.
When first I went into politics, there were no paved roads, no cars, no electricity. Thanks to the Union Nationale government, we now have paved roads and electricity; we now have hospitals and schools. Those were the things with which I busied myself while I was deputy minister.
(Text):


Frank Charles McGee: Mr. Chairman, I am prompted to participate in this discussion for the second time by the speech of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate who had some interesting remarks to make about John Cabot and where he landed. I noticed that some objections were made by the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria.


John Whitney Pickersgill: But they are not on the
record.


Frank Charles McGee: I am sure the hon. member will place that view on the record at the earliest opportunity. I was going to offer in a friendly way the suggestion that perhaps the controversy between the two hon. members is really beside the point after all because I hold in my hand le magazine Maclean of April, 1961 which contains an article by Gustave Lanctot entitled "Les Irlandais au Canada 600 ans avant Colomb", which roughly translated means the Irish arrived in Canada 600 years before Columbus. In any event, Mr. Chairman, I will not go into any more detail with
4372	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs regard to the authenticity of the documentation in this article except to say, more in sorrow than in anger, to the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate and the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria that their discussion and disagreement are perhaps after all quite beside the point.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I cannot allow that to pass because I suspect that the hon. gentleman's pride of race will take somewhat of a bump when I tell him that there is a good deal of support for Mr. Lanctot's contention. The hon. gentleman will recall that when the Norsemen went to Iceland they did not feel it was worth while taking women on the whole voyage and they picked their women up in Ireland on the way, and it was no doubt the descendants of some of those women who came to this continent with Lief Ericsson about the year 1,000, and no doubt that is the argument that Mr. Lanctot is making. But I think perhaps if they did and if any of the descendants of those people were still here, which they are not, and they had to submit to the census that we were talking about earlier this afternoon, they would have to admit, if they told the truth in giving their racial origin, it would be not Irish but Norse, because of the paternal line.
This gives me an opportunity, sir, to cite an authority to the hon. member for Gaspe who I think accepted my word for it even before I got the authority. I have here an authority who I think the hon. gentleman will wish to bow to at once. I have in my hand the Handbook Gazeteer and Almanac of Newfoundland for the year 1941, edited by J. R. Smallwood.


An hon. Member:: Who is he?


John Whitney Pickersgill: An author. I read:
Catalina. Population 882. Third largest settlement in Trinity bay. In 1534 Jacques Cartier spent 10 days here.


An hon. Member:: What for?


Mr. McGrath:: May I ask the hon. gentleman a question. Is this the only authority he has for his contention?


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is the only one I have in my hand but I am sure the hon. gentleman would not contest the fact because, with his wide knowledge of the history of Newfoundland, he will know that this was simply a secondary source and that there is a primary source in Cartier's own account of his voyage.


Harold Edward Winch: May I ask one question. Important as this is, what has it to do with the estimates now before us?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think it is of the greatest possible importance. I am sure the hon. gentleman was asking his question with his


usual solemnity. Perhaps the hon. gentleman may not have heard the original observation on which all this was based, namely that it is of the utmost importance that we should preserve the great relics of our history, and so far as the nation is concerned, it is the responsibility of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources to do that. As I suggested just before dinner, not only is this a very good thing to do from the point of view of the preservation of our history and of our culture but it is also in a very hard material way a very good investment. I am sure the Minister of Forestry who is listening to me will agree, that every time we mark one of those ancient monuments it becomes another attraction for visitors, not only people who travel about the country but visitors to our country from other countries.


Harold Edward Winch: I most certainly agree with the statement made by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate but what I was wondering about was whether we in the House of Commons can decide where Cartier landed. I do not think we can.


John Whitney Pickersgill: He decided that.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: Mr. Chairman, now that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has relinquished the floor-


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was merely answering questions.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: -I can commence my remarks by saying that the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources under its young and energetic minister is beginning to play a more important role throughout all parts of Canada than it ever has before. This development is taking place throughout every province of Canada, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and has made its impression upon my own riding of Queens-Lunenburg in Nova Scotia.
I should first like to join with my colleagues, as well as with members of the opposition, in extending congratulations to the minister upon his appointment to this portfolio. The former minister plotted a firm course to be followed, but I am pleased to note that the present minister has taken a keen interest in all matters pertaining to his department and its administration, and is making further improvements upon the good plans established by his predecessor.
Previous speakers have pointed out the fact that Canada is showing a substantial deficit in her tourist trade with the United States, and it is to the Canadian government travel bureau branch of the department and the national parks branch that I shall direct

most of my remarks. As a Nova Scotian I am fully aware of the impact made upon our economy by the tourist industry, and of the necessity of attracting to Canada and to our particular area a larger number of tourists.
A study of the tourist survey of Nova Scotia as carried out by the Nova Scotia travel bureau in 1960, indicates that the tourist industry is big business, especially in our province. It gives some idea of the factors which influenced tourists to visit Nova Scotia. According to the survey, tourist booklets influence over 52 per cent while magazine and newspaper advertising were effective in encouraging another 35 per cent to visit Nova Scotia. These figures would indicate that tourists will come to your area if you intelligently and carefully promote the beauty spots and historic sites which are to be seen during a visit, and the quality of the hotel and motel accommodations and the variety of sites to be seen will determine the length of their stay.
On February 8, 1961, the hon. E. A. Manson, minister of trade and industry in Nova Scotia stated:
In I960 Nova Scotia's tourist industry achieved new records, both in the number of visitors to the province and in the amount of money they spent.
After studies extending back over four years and intensified in 1960, a revised and corrected system of gathering tourist statistics shows that the number of visitors to Nova Scotia during the four summer months of 1960 totalled 586,111, and their estimated expenditures were $48,328,733.
He further stated:
Canadian and American averages obtained from the 1960 registration card inquiries for the "Order of the Good Time", weighted on the basis of 73 per cent Canadian and 27 per cent American traffic, has led to the conclusion that the value of spending by tourists from other Canadian provinces this year was $30,773,902 and by American visitors, $17,554,830.
Mr. Manson said that Nova Scotia was fortunate in having tourist statistics reaching back, with an interruption during the war years, to 1922. There could be no doubt that the long term trend in Nova Scotia's tourist traffic was sharply upward.
This, of course, is most encouraging.
I was especially pleased to note the minister's comments on the resources for tomorrow conference scheduled to take place in Montreal next October and the fact that water pollution will be a subject for discussion. When we consider the effect of polluted water upon the health of our people and its destructive power in the salmon and inland fisheries as well as the partial destruction of the shellfish industry along our coast especially near the mouths of our rivers, only then do we realize the importance of the legislation introduced by the government to provide assistance to municipalities for the construction of sewage disposal facilities. This is a great forward step, one that was long overdue, and 90205-6-276
Supply-Northern Affairs in view of the importance of our inland fisheries as a tourist attraction I hope it will be possible for federal and provincial fishery conservation officers, as well as municipal wardens and industrial leaders, to attend this conference and outline any further ideas they may have on this important problem.
In the last decade Canadians have spent twice as much money travelling in the United States and abroad compared with the money spent in Canada by Americans and tourists from foreign lands. Our Canadian tourist deficit is an important part of our over-all balance of payments deficit. For a long time the Canadian Manufacturers' Association has been promoting the slogan, "buy Canadian". I think the time has come to adopt another slogan, "Sell Canadian"-"Sell Canada". In view of the benefits that accrue from the tourist industry, not only to private industry but to the federal and provincial governments as well, I believe that government has a responsibility to promote tourism on a national level. These efforts would pay a sizeable dividend in that the expenditures of tourists from other countries would materially benefit our balance of payments position.
Why do Canadians want to visit the United States, the United Kingdom or, for that matter, Paris? I submit that one reason is to visit the historic sites they have previously only seen in pictures or heard about in song or story. Here is a challenge to the new Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources to renew in greater number the historic sites and national parks throughout Canada and especially those in Nova Scotia for the benefit of foreign as well as Canadian tourists. At the present time a start has been made in Nova Scotia with the national park in Cape Breton. It is undoubtedly one of the beauty spots of Canada providing every facility for the visiting tourist. However, I believe there is room in Nova Scotia for another national park and for further development of historic sites, and I believe that some of this should be along the south shore of Nova Scotia.
It is my understanding that the minister plans to visit Nova Scotia this summer and I would welcome the opportunity to show him some of the areas worth developing in my riding. Time will not permit me to mention all the historic sites but we could start at Port Mouton in Queen's county. Here we would see where the French explorer De-Monts first landed at this port in 1604 and established a settlement prior to sailing up the bay of Fundy to Annapolis. We are told that the port received its name because a sheep jumped overboard and was nearly drowned before it was rescued.

Supply-Northern Affairs
In the same year DeMonts entered another harbour which he named Port Rossignol and which retained that name until the new England settlers came in 1759 and 1760 and renamed it Liverpool after the same port in England. During the war of 1812 between the United States and Great Britain, Liverpool became famous as the home of the privateers operating under letters of marque that were granted by the government. One of the earlier privateer owners was a member of the Nova Scotia house of assembly. His name was Mr. Simeon Perkins. On our tour we could visit his home recently restored through the efforts of the historical society of Liverpool and the provincial government.
Another site worth visiting would be fort Point at Liverpool which was originally called fort Morris. It was here in 1773 that Simeon Perkins really distinguished himself. The fort was captured by an American privateer when the British garrison was asleep. Simeon Perkins organized the militia, captured the captain of the American privateer and worked out an agreement whereby he regained control of the fort in exchange for the captain.
Leaving Liverpool we travel along the south shore to Petite Riviere and cape La-have near the mouth of the Lahave river. DeMonts and Champlain in 1604 named it Cap de la Have. In 1632 Isaac DeRazilly fortified it and brought in settlers and in 1670 it was captured by the English and resurrendered to the French. In 1720 Sir William Phips thought of Lahave as a government seat, so we readily see the importance attached to this area in that day.
Travelling through Bridgewater, a town of rare beauty on the Lahave river, with outstanding shopping and tourist accommodations, we next visit Lunenburg, the home of the Bluenose. This famous ship made international racing history and many American tourists come to this town to see the shipbuilding yards where this ship was built. Not only was the Bluenose constructed there but also there was recently constructed for Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer a replica of the Bounty which was made famous in the book, "Mutiny on the Bounty". Here too we can see the site of the old blockhouse built in 1773 by the Hanoverian settlers as a protection from the Indians on what is now called blockhouse hill. At the present the local Lions club is actively interested in restoring this blockhouse and I would urge the minister to give earnest consideration to the restoration of this national historic site as well as those I have previously mentioned.
I am certain the minister will find very few places in Canada as storied and as interesting as Lunenburg county. Near Lunen-

burg town is a place called the Ovens that has long been an attraction to tourists. They are deep caverns worn in the sides of the rocky cliffs, the largest of which is about 18 feet in height and 40 or more feet in depth. The sea is never still and rushes into these caverns making a noise like the report of a heavy cannon. Huge gold discoveries were made here in 1861 and many claims were staked.
In Lunenburg county you will also find the towns of Mahone Bay and Chester and along the coast separating these two towns there are over 300 islands. One of these is widely known as Oak island, famous for the treasures supposed to have been buried there by the famous pirate, Captain Kidd. It was also in Mahone Bay in the year 1813 that the American privateer, Young Teazer, pursued by a man of war, was blown up by a deserter from the British service. It is rumoured to this day that on a foggy night this ship, with its sails flapping in the breeze, can still be seen on the horizon. It is called "the ghost of the flying Dutchman".
At Chester, Nova Scotia, American tourists have already established a large tourist colony due to the fact that the scenery in this area could safely be classed among the most beautiful in the world. Farther along the coast we come to Blandford, first settled by the Irish around 1809. This peninsula is famous for its sandy beaches and its high rise of land called "aspotogan", an old Micmac Indian name, which is approximately 500 feet above sea level and is a landmark for navigators. This area would be exceptionally well suited for a second national park and I hope the minister and his officials will take a careful look at the Blandford district as well as others I have mentioned during our tour of this area. I might add that the minister's visit will be very much improved over any that might have been made in the years when this country was under Liberal rule for I know of no road in Canada that was in worse state than was the Blandford road during those years. However, as a result of the roads to resources program, I am pleased to state that the Blandford road has been under construction, and in a few years it will stand as a monument to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources and his program.
From these remarks hon. members can readily see the many attractions and points of interest my riding in Nova Scotia offers the tourist. At the moment we have a Canadian government travel bureau or tourist office in New York City, one in Chicago and one opening in San Francisco. My riding alone offers points of interest to English, French, German, Swiss, Scots and Irish, to

mention a few, and in this day of jet travel I believe our efforts to encourage tourists should no longer be directed only toward the United States. With London only six hours away by jet and Paris only seven hours from Halifax, I believe we should give some thought to opening a Canadian government travel bureau at least in London and Paris. These places mark the home of our two great cultures which supplied Canada from the Atlantic to the Pacific with its settlers, its traditions, its customs and languages.
Our bilingual country offers hospitality to the English or European tourist that cannot be found in the United States or many other countries. We are more accustomed to dealing with this type of tourist, and we do not look upon them as foreigners but appreciate them for what they are. By establishing our historic sites and giving them proper publicity, there is every reason to expect United Kingdom and European tourists to visit Nova Scotia, the province in which the French, English, Scottish and German settlers first landed, as well as other parts of Canada.
Recently we noticed an article in the Halifax Chronicle-Herald, under the heading, "Nova Scotia businessmen find plums aplenty; They've got London talking". The article reads in part:
Nova Scotia businessmen stuck their thumbs into the British business pie this week and pulled out more plums than they had expected.
With less than half the time elapsed before the Halifax-Amherst trade group returns to Canada, many members of the mission feel they have done more than twice as much as they had hoped.
"When you get London talking you've really done something," said Atlantic provinces agent-general Watson Jamer, "and the Canadian businessmen have done just that".
"There's hardly a business in town that isn't aware Nova Scotia is here," he said.
I submit, Mr. Chairman, that if we can get these people interested in business, then we can interest them in visiting this country. However, it is up to us to stimulate the interest of these people in visiting the places where their countrymen established settlements in the new world. By so doing we not only strengthen our tourist industry, but we show these tourists a way of life. We want our United States friends and our friends from overseas to see us and become acquainted with the freedom we enjoy as Canadians. We want them to see our institutions of government. In this way, they will acquire a feeling for the spirit of democracy which is of vital importance to all of us and to the peace of the entire world.


Mr. Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria):: At the outset of my remarks, I should like to say I have no intention of entering into a controversy with my very good friend, the
90205-6-2761
Supply-Northern Affairs hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, who claimed that John Cabot landed at some particular place. We then had an Irishman from Toronto claiming he landed in another place. My views on this matter have been put on the record and I have not changed them since.
In any event, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity of making a few remarks during the discussion of the estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources because the economy of my constituency, or a large part of it, is wrapped up in what this department may or may not do, especially in Cape Breton Highlands national park. Like other hon. members of the committee, I should like to express my sincerest congratulations to the new minister upon his appointment. I have no doubt, despite the views that have been expressed to the contrary by the all-wise sage from Port Arthur, he will perform his duties well.
The background of the new minister indicates an awareness of the social problems of our society, and this is indicated by his work during his lifetime. During his early years his abilities and talents were made available, through the Salvation Army, to the inmates of Montreal's Bordeaux jail and St. Vincent de Paul penitentiary. He also performed similar services in Toronto. Later, he served with distinction in the Royal Canadian Air Force and was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross. His career in politics, including his activities as parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and now as Minister of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, indicates that he has devoted his life to doing good for his fellow-men. I have no doubt his work as minister of this department will be such that, in the future, we will all be as proud of him as we have been in the past.
Having made that statement, I should like now to bring to the attention of the minister the wage rates that are paid to workers in the Cape Breton park. I brought this matter to the attention of the previous minister, and also to the committee, on several occasions. I should like to report that we have made some small progress. The labour rate at this park is now $1.05 an hour compared with 85 cents an hour before this government came into office. However, as I pointed out on another occasion, this rate is certainly not in keeping with the rates that are paid in the majority of the national parks throughout Canada. It is certainly not a proper wage rate.
As we are all aware, government employee wage surveys are conducted by the Department of Labour at the request of the employing department. I should like to suggest to the minister that the time is past due when

Supply-Northern Affairs a request for another survey should be made.
I would renew my request that when this survey is made consideration be given to the different wage rates that are in effect throughout Cape Breton island and that it be not restricted to the area immediately surrounding the park.
I should like to commend the government, the previous minister and the present minister, for the activities that have been carried out in the park in recent years. The winter works program and the extra work projects that have been carried out in the park have provided a level of employment to my constituents such as they had never experienced in this area previously. I join with my colleague, the hon. member for Inverness-Rich-mond, who remarked the other day in the house that the area concerned has been more prosperous because of the greater amount of work that has been carried out.
In support of this statement, I should like to put on the record the amounts expended in wages at the Cape Breton Highlands national park for the years 1953 to 1960-61. These totals include the salaries of civil servants, prevailing rate employees, and employees on construction work. The years and the amounts expended are in tabulated form, as follows:
1953- 54	 $ 189,666
1954-	55	
179,5151955-	56	
307,8851956-	57	
328,9341957-	58	
409,8781958-	59	
392,8231959-	60	
421,0291960-	61	
504,898
This, of course, is completely separate and apart from expenditures made on highway construction in the park. This work which has been carried out means so much to my constituents that I trust it will be continued at a similar rate and expanded to a greater degree if at all possible. I suggest to the minister that this be done.
At the present time great strides are being made in the construction of a large camping ground in the Ingonish area, which I may say is urgently needed to eliminate overcrowding which occurs every year during the tourist season. There is certainly room for further great expansion in this park in many fields.
I must say that of the few recommendations in the recent Rand report with which I agree, two are the recommendations concerning the expansion and development of the Cape Breton Highlands national park, and also the one relating to Fort Louisbourg in the constituency of my colleague from Inverness-Richmond who has been devoting himself so strenuously in this regard.

May I also bring to the attention of the minister the matter of reforestation within the confines of the park. Over a period of years a large portion of the park has been burned over, unfortunately, due to forest fires. I would urge that the minister give consideration to the matter of beautifying the park in the areas where this has occurred.
I realize that the government has in effect a program of financial assistance to the provinces for the purposes of reforestation of vacant crown lands, and in view of this I see no reason why some arrangement could not be worked out in an area such as the park, where it is totally owned by the federal government.
Just recently I brought to the attention of the Minister of Forestry the question of reforestation in Cape Breton. I also brought this to the attention of the Prime Minister, with the thought in mind that, should we eventually have to face the prospect of mine closures, I felt there was no reason why a corps of a couple of hundred of men could not be occupied for a period of up to, say, two years in this type of work.
A program of this nature has been carried out with great success in Great Britain, and I urge the minister to see whether some mutual arrangement could be made whereby this could be carried out in the area I have mentioned.
Another point I should like to draw to the attention of the minister is one that I have discussed with the previous minister and his departmental officials for quite a period of time. That is the question of the historic site at Englishtown and, to be more explicit, Port Dauphin.
At the present time a cairn is located there with the following inscription:
Settled in 1629 by Capt. Charles Daniel and site of an early Jesuit mission selected in 1713 as a naval base and one of the principal places in Isle Royale, named Port Dauphin and strongly fortified. Its importance declined with the choice in 1719 of Louisburg as the capital.
In fact Englishtown is the site of the first permanent white settlement in all Cape Breton and, I am informed, of the first Jesuit mission on the North American continent.
In 1629 a French fort was built at the mouth of Ste. Anne's bay by Captain Daniel of Dieppe. Jesuit priests named the settlement Sainte Anne, in honour of Queen Anne of Austria, the mother of Louis XIV. In 1713 a new fort was built and the place was renamed Fort Dauphin.
I would urge the minister and his departmental officials, to give consideration to the establishment in this area of a national historic park. The historic sites and monuments board, which I understand advise the

minister on the importance of proposed historic sites, have considered this subject on several occasions but have not come to any conclusive decision.
The previous minister advised me that he wished to have the full assurance of the board that Fort Dauphin is of sufficient importance in the broad history of the nation to warrant, in addition to the bronze tablet and cairn already erected there, the establishment of a national historic park.
I understand that this proposition is to appear on the agenda of the board when they hold their meeting next month. I do hope the matter will be gone into very thoroughly at that time and that we will have a favourable decision.
Let me now turn to the question of a new clubhouse for the golf course at the national park. We are fortunate in having one of the finest golf courses in Canada and I only wish I could say that the clubhouse was in keeping with the course.
I brought this question to the attention of the previous minister and, while I realize that tremendous work has been done in the park and that this new construction is receiving every consideration, we have not as yet been successful in having this consideration become a reality.
I would once again urge the minister to go into this matter most thoroughly, and I shall appreciate the opportunity, if he visits the national park this coming summer-and we will certainly welcome him-of taking him on a personal inspection of the clubhouse. I do not think he will be very proud of it.
On a number of occasions I brought to the attention of the previous minister and the department the matter of the restoration of the original Hydrofoil craft, HD4, which was the brainchild of the late Alexander Graham Bell and was the subject of one of his many experiments.
My appeal on those occasions was, of course, for the preservation, restoration and display of this craft. As a result we were very fortunate in that the department made the necessary arrangements and had this relic transported across the Bras d'Or lakes to the locale of the present Bell museum.
However, as yet there is no visible evidence that the restoration will take place, or any evidence of a shelter being constructed so that this craft can be displayed to the many thousands of visitors who visit the museum annually.
I would like the minister to advise me just how soon we can look forward to action being taken along the lines I have suggested, and explain further the reason for the delay. I shall be interested in being provided with any information he has on this project, as it
Supply-Northern Affairs is one well worthy of consideration, mainly because of the fact that it is one of the few objects of this magnitude with which this great man experimented.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I should like to proceed to another subject, and that is the matter of the provision of ski trails at the Cape Breton Highlands national park.
I was pleased to note in the speech from the throne that this government indicated it was interested in the promotion of physical fitness. With this in mind I should like to once again bring to the attention of the minister, as I did to his predecessor, the tremendous benefits which would be derived by having proper ski facilities at the Cape Breton Highlands national park.
I have indicated to the minister in the past just how suitable certain areas of the park, such as South Harbour mountain and several others, would be for the promotion of skiing. It is a sad thing that the tremendous facilities we have available in the park are available only for the short summer season.
Here is an opportunity where great benefit could be derived by the economy of Cape Breton in the introduction of tourist trade during the winter months in the participation of this sport. I can also envisage the labour force that would be needed to prepare these facilities.
There is no doubt at all in my mind that facilities would be provided by the people in the area for the housing accommodation of those interested, should the government take the initiative in establishing the trails and tows.
I understand it has been suggested by departmental officials that there was no object in providing a skiing area since there would be no tourist accommodation available to people who wished to participate in this sport. It is also my understanding that resort owners in the Ingonish area have not taken too kindly to this view, as I feel quite sure they want all the business they can obtain, especially in the winter. Accommodation facilities are there now.
There are a great number of benefits to be derived besides the physical fitness aspect of the proposition. Apart from the money that would be spent on local labour to cut trails and make the necessary skiing facilities, money would also be spent on gasoline, accommodation and meals by visitors to the park who wished to engage in this sport.
It is quite true that large returns could not be expected immediately, but I am sure immediate steps to provide these facilities would reap great rewards in the future.
It is a well known fact that in this part of Nova Scotia there is always more snowfall than anywhere else. Experts in this field have

Supply-Northern Affairs advised me that we have a great potential for this sport in the Cape Breton Highlands national park, so I leave these thoughts with the minister for his consideration. We have the snow, we have the scenery, we have the terrain and we have the interest. All that is needed now is more activity on the part of the department to bring these thoughts into reality. We have excellent highways leading to the park and, indeed, throughout Cape Breton Island as a result of the wonderful co-operation between the Stanfield government of Nova Scotia and this government in the past few years in connection with the roads to resources program. There are also many more highway projects which have been agreed upon by both governments but which are yet to be carried out.
I commend the government on this legislation. It was only this week that ceremonies were held in Cape Breton in connection with the completion of the steel structure of the new bridge across the Bras d'Or lakes. This bridge, costing more than $5 million, was brought about as a result of an agreement between the government of Nova Scotia and the federal government, the federal government paying 90 per cent of the cost and the provincial government paying 10 per cent. When this new bridge, the Robert L. Stanfield bridge, is officially opened in a few months, I suggest that we shall see a greater influx of visitors to the Cape Breton park than ever before and, believe me, their number has been growing enormously every year over the past few years. This in itself is reason enough why the department should develop the park to the greatest possible extent.
Before I resume my seat, may I wish the minister well. I look forward to his visit to the park and I also look forward to seeing some activity along the lines of the proposals I have made. When he replies I trust that he will comment on some of the items I have brought to his attention.
(Translation):


Mr. Caron:: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to take up too much of the time of the house, but I do wish to set the record straight.
First, I should like to congratulate the new Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources (Mr. Dinsdale). He is endowed with fine qualities, is congenial and is a hard worker. I have seen him at work in several committees, and it was always a pleasure to work with him. I wish him every success in his new department.
In the remarks he made on April 21, the member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm

(Mr. Pigeon) said something that must be corrected, because it does not represent the facts exactly as they are.
After a previous question, he asked the minister what was the language taught to the Eskimos, in addition to their own Eskimo language. The minister replied that for a number of reasons, mainly of an economic nature, it was the English language.
So far so good. Mind you, Mr. Chairman, I am not criticizing the minister I know how difficult these things are. In fact, we cannot always do as we wish very often, our actions are dictated by economic factors, even if we do not exactly like it.
Following that reply, the member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm said this:
Mr. Chairman, may I add that that situation was created and has existed since 1949, in other words, under the Liberal administration of which the member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier), as minister of transport, was a member, as was Mr. Jean Lesage, the present premier of Quebec, as minister of northern affairs and national resources and who was therefore chiefly responsible for that situation.
Mr. Chairman, the language taught in northern Canada has always been a problem, and that problem cannot be settled by the present minister any more than it could be by the former minister. Mind you, if the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm was trying to make political capital out of it, I would be the last to blame him.
In fact, I think it is fair and resonable that an hon. member should try to make political capital even in this house. But one must also be generous to abstain from imputing motives to those who are being criticized.
The hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm did not say exactly that the intentions of the Liberal predecessor of the present minister were bad, but he got around the difficulty and implied that the minister did not go too much out of his way and did not try to improve the situation.
Well, we find-and I say so for the benefit of the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm-in the budget discussion on Monday, March 28, 1955, a statement made by the then minister of northern affairs and national resources, Mr. Jean Lesage.
Those projects were discussed at length with bishop Marsh, of the Church of England, and Msgr. Trocellier, of the Catholic church. Both agreed that it is the best program likely to meet the needs in the north and to cope with the difficulties which became greater these last few years because of inadequate school facilities for the children of both religions in the different localities.
We realize, in the light of that text, that the then minister intended to improve the situation.

I am convinced that, even it the present minister does not have much success in this regard, it is not from a lack of good will. In fact, he is one of the hon. members who have always displayed much good will.
Mr. Chairman, I only wanted to stress this: when one makes political hay one must do it carefully so as not to belittle in any way those who used to be in power and who had intended to do right.
(Text):


Mr. Legere:: As I rise to take part in this debate on the estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources I do so in the spirit of co-operation and in support of what previous members from Nova Scotia have advocated for the betterment of our province so appropriately known as the ocean's playground. I am proud to be from this peninsula-the most weather beaten province of the dominion-one that has stood the test of time. What Nova Scotia lacks in size is more than made up in rugged scenic beauty that so invitingly attracts tourists from other lands.
I was delighted when an invitation was extended to the minister to visit Cape Breton and the Cabot trail. Mention, and rightly so, was made of historical Louisburg. Interesting and varied relics recall here part of Canada's history in its early days and attest to the truth of the fight for supremacy in Canada by two great races. One relives the days of the pioneers' privation and hardships and sees today that all of this was not in vain.
However, in the same spirit that prompted previous Nova Scotia members, and not forgetting that my people think also in terms of equal distribution, and in the knowledge that a fair appraisal cannot be given before all is seen and explored, I open wide to the minister the constituency doors of Shelburne-Yarmouth-Clare. Do come on in and browse around and enjoy here the pause that refreshes. I ask him to enter, and I am sure that once he browses around he will indeed find the pause that refreshes.
I need not point out historical facts and events relating to my area of southwestern Nova Scotia. This has been done admirably by the town fathers of Shelburne town. Clare's yearly and colourful Acadian festival vividly succeeds in this historial revival. (Translation):
At this point in my remarks, Mr. Chairman, I would like, with your permission, to pay homage to my friends the Acadians of Baie Ste. Marie. I would like to tell them the high regard in which their yearly festival is held, showing as it does that if they have
Supply-Northern Affairs not entirely forgotten, they have at least forgiven, thus giving a magnificent example to the rest of the world.
(Text):
This year from July 23 to July 29 the Yarmouth "bicenturama" will, after its celebration, leave no doubt in the minds of the visitors fortunate enough to attend, why Yarmouth is called the gateway to the maritimes, and convince those who come to view that they should stay longer than they planned.
We also have natural attractions; nature has seen and still sees to that. We have plenty of trout filled lakes, winding highways and byways, scenery that is rugged and as eye catching as any sea lashed coast in the world, a marine life second to none in the world-in reality a nimrod's delight-a wild life that continues to test and try the skill of sportsmen, amateur and professional. The giant tuna lurks in our waters and still challenges sportsmen from all over the world. Schooling pollock gather close to our shore, frolic and swish in playful fashion at the edge of a turbulent riptide. Oftentimes they seek still waters and in so doing whet the exuberance of youth and stimulate the fading eagerness of the aged.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to believe that the minister agrees that such a setting and tourist attraction should be enhanced by the establishment of a national park. In the nature of suggestion, and wishing to forsake any idea of dictating, I would like to see a marine life display implemented within the confines of a national park. I can assure the minister that our sea coast lends itself admirably well toward this combination of nature's attractions, housed within the sanctuary of a park, to entice greater numbers of tourists to sojourn where perhaps they only intended to linger. At this moment I cannot foresee such a national park housing a marine life display without the presence of the lordly lobster, unconcerned in his migration, taunted by the silvery haddock, shadowed by the silent cod, fearful of the grey seal's acrobatics, and attempting to capture the elusive pollock, all of this viewed by the motionless and almost unseen halibut.
Mr. Chairman, I have indicated what nature has provided us in southwestern Nova Scotia, and I anticipate that the minister will do his share. I should like to indicate what the people there have done for themselves. In the provision of tourist facilities, they have set up many roadside tables, trailer campsites, have built motels and renovated hotels. I am sure that the minister will be most helpful in seeing that these are continually filled to capacity.
I would also like to point out in conclusion that accompanied by what the minister will

Supply-Northern Affairs give us, what our people have provided is the friendly and warm hospitality of a people ambitious to forge ahead and prosper.


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Chairman, I should like to speak for a few minutes in support of my distinguished friend the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, in respect of the arguments he advanced regarding an appropriate monument to mark the landfall of John Cabot, or John Caboto, depending on the part of the country you hail from.
I would suggest that, by and large, it is time that the government of Canada, with the research, knowledge and advice of its experts, should adjudicate on this controversy, deciding once and for all where the landfall of John Cabot actually was because, in essence, Cabot is the only discoverer of Canada. There are hon. gentlemen sitting in other parts of the house who would debate this subject and who would advance arguments in favour of Jacques Cartier, but I will compromise with those gentlemen, who are welcome to their historical traditions and opinions, by recommending the establishment of a discovery day for Canada and recognition of Jacques Cartier and John Cabot as the co-discoverers. I think hon. members will agree that half a loaf is better than none at all. I do believe, however, that we should honour the day on which these early navigators and adventurers discovered this then unknown land. I think that historic day should be marked appropriately.
The traditional landfall of John Cabot is cape Bonavista, which is in the constituency of my hon. friend opposite. There is substantial historical evidence to support this contention, and I do feel that it at least warrants study and earnest consideration by the historic sites and monuments board. I believe that the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, with the enthusiasm, vigour and earnestness he brings to that department, will see to it that the proper study and attention are given to this subject.
There are those individuals who will say that John Cabot landed at Cape Breton in 1497, but in actual fact the argument in support of that is less than 50 years old. All that one has in support of that argument is a map supposedly drawn or drafted by the son of John Cabot, John Sebastian Cabot. There is at the present time, however, a very earnest study being made of this subject by learned scholars and historians. One learned historian at the university of Miami in the United States has substantial evidence to support the theory that John Cabot did in fact land at Cape Breton, but that several years before his landfall there he had in fact visited the island of Newfoundland. I am sure that in


arguing today in support of the Newfoundland landfall the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate advanced the argument that the name "Bonavista" is derived from the fact that when Cabot, the Genoese navigator and adventurer, sighted the first landfall he is alleged to have said, "O Buena vista", which means "O happy sight". I am sure my learned friend from Bonavista-Twillingate probably said the same thing in 1953


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is right.	,


James Aloysius McGrath: -because it has in fact been a happy sight for him. But I do believe that this site should be marked. I think there is substantial evidence to support the cape Bonavista landfall.
In the vicinity of cape Bonavista there is being developed-it is practically completed-a national park called Terra Nova park. It will certainly supplement the development of this park if consideration were to be given to erecting a monument on cape Bonavista to mark the landfall of what I think and what many people today are coming around to believe was the first landfall of Cabot in what is now known as Canada. In that respect, Mr. Chairman, one would wonder, whether John Cabot landed at cape Bonavista in 1494 or in Cape Breton in 1497, what would go through the mind of this Genoese navigator from Bristol if he were to return to the scene of his triumph some 450 years later? One would wonder what he would find. Well, I have no doubt that the old mariner would be much impressed with what he would find. Perhaps amongst the least significant things he would find would be the fact that there was one who had followed in his footsteps some 450 years later. Perhaps they had a little in common in that Cabot was an adventurer and a navigator from Genoa sailing out of Bristol and Pickersgill was a navigator, and a landlocked navigator sailing out of Manitoba in a prairie schooner.


Robert Muir: I wish to make a correction so that the minister will not be misinformed. I should like to advise him not to [DOT] lose too much sleep about all these markers and monuments because there already is a monument, a cairn, and bust of John Cabot on the northern tip of Cape Breton island, marking the spot where Cabot landed, erected there by the Cape Breton historical society.


Mr. Batten:: That was the second time.


Mr. Macquarrie:: It gives me the greatest pleasure to congratulate a long time friend of mine, the present minister, who is adding so greatly to the cabinet by his heading of this important department. He is a man who,

while aggressive and able, is also agreeable and is entertained in high regard by hon. members in this house. 1 look forward to great things from the new minister; among those a greater impetus in the program with respect to the international peace garden between Manitoba and North Dakota in the riding of Brandon-Souris.
I heard my colleagues from the province of Nova Scotia inviting the minister to come down and visit them. One member wants him to go skiing in Cape Breton and another member wants him to come across the south shore. It was suggested that he might go to the places that Cabot visited, although there is some difference of opinion as to what those actually were. Before he was minister I was fortunate enough to have the hon. gentleman come to Prince Edward Island and he was good enough to launch my campaign in 1956. I look forward to his return. If he returns he will find that in the years since 1956 because of certain changes which have taken place in Ottawa and in Charlottetown that Prince Edward Island generally is an even more beautiful place than it was at that time.
I listened to the learned and hon. gentlemen discuss history tonight. I am not going away back into historical researches; I am going to talk only about the tourist business. In Prince Edward Island, of course, we consider that Jacques Cartier was our first tourist. I go back only as far as 1534 when that great man was in our province. He stopped there and he said it was not only the fairest land that he had ever seen but indeed one could not conceive of a fairer. He referred to certain other parts of what is now Canada as probably being the land that God gave to Cain, but he did not say that about Prince Edward Island. He was our first and one of our most appreciative visitors from Europe.
The department which the minister heads has contributed in no small measure to the improvement in our economy and indeed in our spirits in Prince Edward Island, which I mentioned just a moment ago. The roads to resources program has stimulated the greatest highway construction program that Prince Edward Island has ever known in its long history. We are proud of the fact that-I hope my hon. friend from Cape Breton North and Victoria will not take exception to this-the Prince Edward Island national park tops all other parks in Canada in the increase in tourists in the last year. We had over 412,000 people come to that beautiful park on the north side of Prince Edward Island and the north side of Queens county. For many years the national park stood there. A program of development was seemingly much retarded.
90205-6-277
Supply-Northern Affairs It is only in recent years that great development programs have been proceeded with.
I can say that while the number of visitors to the province of Prince Edward Island is increasing, the province is able to look after them well and they will be welcomed. We will do an even better job if the Minister of Public Works will construct a causeway because they will come to us so much more quickly. Perhaps this is not the time to go into that matter, nor is this the department under which to discuss it.
I think the minister can look with satisfaction upon the results in my province of the campsite program. We have had many new developments on some beautiful sites. It is said, of course, that the whole of Prince Edward Island could be a park, but new sites have been developed. I think this is a splendid program and I would commend to the minister, lest he think that I am incapable of suggesting that there are areas within his department capable of being improved, that perhaps the campsite program might easily be geared to the roads to resources program and not exclusively to the trans-Canada highway.
I do not know how many hon. members know that much of the increase in tourist activity in recent years in the Atlantic provinces stems from the excellent and special program of the Canadian government travel bureau. The recent setting aside of $300,000 for special advertising in the eastern states, with emphasis upon the Atlantic provinces, has borne great fruit. I think the suggestion that has been offered by the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg for a heavier concentration of activity in this connection in the United Kingdom is a good one. We rejoice in the Atlantic provinces that just a year ago Halifax was linked in direct T.C.A. contact with the United Kingdom. This will prevent the unfortunate tendency that sometimes prevails when visitors from the United Kingdom and Europe make a visit to Canada. Often they started in Montreal and moved westward. This is now no longer necessary.
A special project of much interest to me is the Fort Amherst historic park. Prince Edward Island has an interesting history under French occupation and then early days as an English colony and many years as a province in confederation. The site of Port Lajoie and Fort Amherst is specially suited for a park. I commend them for developing it. I realize that these projects have a great archaeological historical development and much study, but I would suggest that even though the site has lain there for a couple of centuries without development that perhaps even though it is an historic spot, a
4382	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs little speed would not be amiss in the development of that project on the south side of Prince Edward Island.
I was almost tempted to follow the line of some of the learned speakers who have preceded me and I think it is commendable we have given some time to a discussion and appraisal of, and perhaps even disagreement over, our historic sites. Many Nova Scotians have spoken tonight. I should like to put on the record the words of one of the greatest Nova Scotians who began as a Liberal and ended, I think you might say, as a Conservative. I refer not to the great Sir Robert Borden who did the same thing but to an earlier man, Joseph Howe, who said:
A wise nation preserves its records, gathers up its muniments, decorates the tombs of its illustrious dead, repairs its great public structures, and fosters national pride and love of country, by perpetual reference to the sacrifices and glories of the past.
We have done so tonight. We have gone back to Cabot, Jacques Cartier, Leif Ericsson and Eric the Red. I can only say that very soon in Prince Edward Island we are going back in a similar way to 1864. I have the honour of representing the city of Charlottetown where confederation was born and I know that the minister, with his great historic knowledge, with his imaginative view of a developing Canadianism, will want to play a major part in the celebrations that will take place in the capital of the province of Prince Edward Island in 1964. We are not unaware nor unappreciative of the fact that a great building is to be constructed in honour and commemoration of this event, that the various provinces of Canada are signifying their interest in and appreciation of the event and that the dominion government through the Prime Minister has pledged its support for this great and happy celebration to which all of our people look forward.
I hope that when the minister is through travelling in Nova Scotia

my colleagues there are going to keep him busy because they are suggesting national parks here and there-he will come to Prince Edward Island for a rest. Our province is small. I can show him in a couple of days all the places where we want new parks and then he can have a rest. I wish him well in his endeavours and to show how kindly I am in my regard I will terminate my remarks at this juncture.


Mr. Benidickson:: Mr. Chairman, I want to offer my congratulations to the minister as this is the first opportunity I have had to do so since his appointment to this high office. We have much in common with our backgrounds in Manitoba. There is a saying among Canadians of Icelandic descent that


we must all be cousins because our population is so small, and I am sure that his wife and I are perhaps cousins.
My point in rising is to ask whether there is anything in the estimates with relation to what is called a civic centre appropriation in Banff, Alberta. When the minister has a chance to reply perhaps he would give us that information. I have tried to look through the estimates and I do not find anything specifically along this line.
It is a very healthy thing that people in Canada occasionally advance to members of the opposition suggestions that certain things should be queried. That is very desirable and I must confess that this information came to me in that way. The minister was in the opposition at one time and he knows the value of this kind of query. Before the first item is passed, would the minister indicate whether or not my information from an outside source is correct that there is in the estimates $350,000 for a civic centre in Banff? If so, what are the reasons for it? I do not want to quarrel with the member in whose constituency Banff lies, but is this something that can be applied as a national policy across the board if other centres have the same justification?


Mr. Nielsen:: Mr. Chairman, when I last spoke on these estimates I indicated there were two other sectors of the northern economy that I wanted to cover before the first item was passed. On April 21 I dealt with the question of the political development of the Yukon particularly and now I want to deal with the material and resource development of the north.
While I have been very interested in the remarks maritime members have made tonight concerning the development of national parks, tourism and the like, I believe the committee is glossing over the main activity of the department in the development of what constitutes 40 per cent of the territory of our nation. The material and resource development of the northern portions of Canada are most important to the future national economic growth of this country. These regions are rich beyond measure in natural resources, in mineral products for which demand is growing throughout the whole world day by day. Rare minerals are being required in ever-increasing quantities by those engaged in the race for outer space.
For the purpose of organizing the efficient search for and development of the mineral resources of the north, one of the most vital sectors in which the department should be interesting itself, and I am sure the minister is aware of this, is the field of research. I have spoken on previous occasions in the

house this session about the need for northern research. The need of a co-ordinated research program in the north is very vital to research development which ultimately will benefit the whole nation.
The need of research in the field of transportation is one of the most vital sectors on which the department should be focusing its attention. One of the more urgent requirements is a complete assessment of the transportation needs of the Mackenzie river watershed in the Northwest Territories. Transportation problems in this area are rapidly developing to a point where they are going to cause real difficulties from the point of view of the requirements of the area. The research efforts of the federal departments should be directed toward the field of communication and navigation systems in the north generally, particularly telephone and telegraph communications, railroads and radio. New methods of transportation and new methods of communication are vital to orderly development in these northern regions.
The development of new types of transportation vehicles such as the Letourneau Monster, is one early result of scientific ingenuity in this field. I believe there are even more startling vehicles and modes of transportation on the drawing boards today. There should be some co-ordination of effort in the gathering of information on the manufacturing of tires and equipment, information now available in the armed forces, information which has been garnered by soldiers, airmen and naval personnel who have had experience in these regions. There should be co-ordination of information which has been gathered by research agencies, engine manufacturers and the like; research in the field of transportation systems, economic routes and load analyses. I believe the department should take the lead here in co-ordinating the efforts of the Department of Transport, the armed forces, the railroad industries and of transportation consultants generally.
In other words, there should be research, first in the selection and integration of existing forms of travel in the north, on land, sea, air, rail and pipe line. It is not inconceivable that the oil resources of the north will perhaps one day be transported by means of some sort of plastic pipe line. The British have made great strides in this field by towing a sort of plastic sausage in which oil products are carried behind a submarine. The efforts of the Department of Transport and those of the Department of National Defence should be co-ordinated and related in this field. There should be research into the climate, terrain, exploration methods, survey methods. There should be research into soil mechanics and 90205-6-277i
Supply-Northern Affairs terradynamics, power generation, atomic power, hydro, thermal and diesel.
It is interesting to note that progress has been made by the Soviet union in the field of research in these sectors. I should like to quote from the Soviet news bulletin, which is undated but of recent vintage, an article concerned with northern research. I quote:
Gordon Robertson, Canada's deputy minister of northern affairs and national resources in his speech to parliament said that "the U.S.S.R. is ahead of Canada in the development of the northern regions, and it is high time for us to admit it. Soviet union engages in vast research work in the north. U.S.S.R. has done more in this respect than all the countries of the world put together." The symposium on the problems of development of Canada's northwestern regions of 1958, stressed the need of assimilating from the Russians the principle of planning in solving the questions of development of the northern areas.
The article continues in a like vein. I believe we have a good deal to learn from the Russian efforts in the north. At the risk of being quoted in the Soviet news bulletin, I would suggest that it might prove useful if the minister were to arrange for the freest possible exchange of information between the officials of his department and those engaged in similar efforts in the Soviet union. I think we could learn a good deal from the efforts of the Soviet union, and I am sure they could learn a good deal from our own efforts in the north.
One of the newest institutes of an academic nature to make its entry into the field has been the Boreal institute of the university of Alberta. The object of this recently formed institute is to do research along the same lines as that of the Arctic institute which has its headquarters, as the minister knows, in Montreal. One of the objects of the Boreal institute, which incidentally is prepared to make a go of it on an initial capital of $10,000, is to provide an information centre, training and inspection, and to undertake, co-ordinate and administer research in the north. I have a statement of the objectives of the Boreal institute which I shall be glad to pass along to the minister if he has not a copy of it, as I suspect he has. Institutes like these are very deserving of the support of the federal government by way of grants to further this very necessary and vital work to the future economic benefit of Canada.
When we were last discussing these estimates, the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont asked me a question which can be found at page 3882 of Hansard for April 21. He asked me if I was aware of the fact that other federal government departments had made substantial expenditures in our northern areas. I have requested the officials of the

Supply-Northern Affairs department of northern affairs to obtain for me some statistics in this regard. While they are not lengthy, I do not wish to bore the committee by reading them now. I would ask permission, at this stage, Mr. Chairman, to have these statistics which have been provided by the officials of the northern affairs department printed in Hansard.


The Acting Chairman (Mr. MacEwan):: Would the hon. member give the source of his statistics?


Erik Nielsen: Yes, I did. They were prepared by the officials of the department of northern affairs.


John Whitney Pickersgill: What are they about?


Erik Nielsen: They show the expenditures of all federal government departments in the Yukon and Northwest Territories from 1952 to date. There are other expenditures of the department itself in the Yukon and Northwest Territories covering this period.


William Moore Benidickson: Is it about a page in length?


Erik Nielsen: I have four pages of statistics here.


Howard Russell MacEwan: Has
the hon. member unanimous consent to have these statistics printed in Hansard at this point?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The statistics above referred to, follow:]
OIL AND GAS Exploratory Expenditures N.W.T. AND Y.T.
1954
1956
$ 8,344,579	$ 32,599,956
$	311,454	1957	
$ 2,630,9332,277,570	1958	
2,851,3152,575,736	1959	
7,790,4293,179,819	1960	
19,327,279



FEDERAL REVENUE FROM OIL AND GAS

[Stage Direction]
N.W.T.	Y.T.	TOTAL1953-	54. 	
1954-	55	
1955-	56	
1956-	57	
$	104,588 293,654 568,220 566,178	$	6,100 17,331 875 66,488	$ 110,688 310,985 569,095 632,666$	1,532,640	$	90,794	$ 1,623,4341957-	58	
1958-	59	
1959-	60	
1960-	61	
$	823,456 6,614,331 986,105 1,836,797	$	92,209 1,548,315 40,078 5,916	S 915,665 8,162,646 1,026,183 1,842,7138 10,260,689	$	1,686,518	$ 11,947,207
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE All Federal Departments
Northwest Territories		Yukon Territory
Revenue	Expenditure	Revenue Expenditures	$	$ $1952-53	
684,699	9,719,751	3,478,288	4,292,9081953-54	
581,909	11,056,471	3,517,776	10,266,5111954-55	
851,938	11,862,140	4,099,114	10,713,5051955-56	
1,993,818	13,823,959	4,005,349	10,969,7914,112,364	46,462,321	15,100,527	36,242,7151956-57	
2,337,296	20,952,972	3,841,061	13,707,7041957-58	
2,856,750	34,430,168	3,815,314	20,037,1081958-59	
9,360,866	47,153,464	5,522,951	24,195,0431959-60	
6,631,304	54,307,989	4,809,600	21,977,03321,186,216	156,844,593	17,988,926	79,916,888
Note-Records for these Territories are not kept separately and the divisions are approximate.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Northern Affairs
NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL RESOURCES Expenditures in Northern Canada
1952-53	1953-54	1954-55	1955-56	1956-57	Total- 5 Year Period$	$	$	$	$	$1. Administration and Operation, including Purchase of Equipment	2,990,034	2,798,709	3,428,453	4,753,726	6,442,202	20,413,1242. Construction in Territories: a) Yukon Territory (i) Contributions-Airstrips and Road Construction and Maintenance 	222,394	320,164	250,530	378,000	279,519	1,450,607(ii) Contributions-Territorial Schools	14,000	18,290	32,290(iii) Federal Roads and Bridges...	9,905	-	35,050	410,820	494,213	949,988(iv) Buildings and Works	235,010	29,978	43,008	79,473	42,958	430,427467,309	350,142	342,588	886,583	816,690	2,863,312b) N.W.T., Wood Buffalo Park, Northern Quebec and Manitoba (i) Contributions-Airstrips and Road Construction and Maintenance 	Average per year 2,781 138,288	572,663 141,069(ii) Federal Roads and Bridges...	39,382	2,620	2,501	131,496	1,640,994	1,816,993(iii) Federal Schools	-	132,441	75,288	280,395	520,782	1,008,906(iv) Federal Hostels	-	-	-	24,544	629,120	653,664(v) Other Federal Buildings and Works	118,545	201,377	249,814	530,127	1,909,144	3,009,007157,927	336,438	327,603	969,343	4,838,328	6,629,639TOTAL-Northern Administration Branch Expenditures	3,615,270	3,485,289	4,098,644	Average per year 6,609,652 12,097,220	1,325,928 29,906,075
Average per year 5,981,215
Major steel highway bridges constructed during period-2 completed and 2 commenced Roads built-Development or equivalent standard-50 miles Airstrips built with federal contributions-Nil
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Northern Affairs
NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL RESOURCES Expenditures in Northern Canada
1957-58	1958-59	1959-60	1960-61 1961-62 (Forecast) (Estimates)	Total 5 year Period$	$	s	$	$	$1. Administration and Operation, including Purchase of Equipment....	6,870,490	9,256,453	13,683,060	11,490,000	18,916,818	115,026,8212. Construction in Territories: a) Yukon Territory (i)	Contributions-Airstrips and Road Construction and Maintenance 	
(ii)	Contributions-Territorial Schools	
(iii)	Federal Roads and Bridges... (iv)	Buildings and Works	267,374 480,942 66,153	2,235,609 119,027	5,602 4,172,705 116,710	20,000 16,000 3,400,000 160,000	20,000 130.000 5,073,000 199.000	312,976 146,000 15,362,256 660,890814,469	2,354,636	4,295,017	3,596,000	5,422,000	16,482,122Average per year	3,298,4256) N.W.T., Wood Buffalo Park, Northern Quebec and Manitoba (i) Contributions-Airstrips and Road Construction and Maintenance	
(ii)	Federal Roads and Bridges... (iii)	Federal Schools	
(iv)	Federal Hostels	
(v)	Other Federal Buildings and Works	11,468 3,716,319 1,768,533 3,018,457 2,378,238	41,618 3,811,663 2,052,898 2,802,788 5,262,630	9,967 4,595,881 1,203,175 1,204,576 5,746,418	80,000 3.825.000 1,000,000 340,000 7.750.000	87.500 3,955,000 1,108,500 527.500 4,603,400	230,553 19,903,863 7,133,106 7,893,32 25,740,68610,893,015	13,971,597	12,760,017	12,995,000	10,281,900	60,901,529Average per year	12,180,306TOTAL-Northern Administration Branch Expenditures	18,577,974	25,582,686	30,738,094	28,081,000	34,620,718	137,600,472Average per year	27,520,094Major steel highway bridges constructed during period-completed 2 started in previous period and built 5 additional. Roads built-Development or equivalent standard-377 miles. Airstrips built with federal contributions-4.
Erik Nielsen: I want to turn for just a moment to the material concerning resources development in the Yukon and Northwest Territories and the expenditures on the development of roads and bridges in those two areas. The Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources during the years 1952 and 1957 spent the sum of $2.5 million in the Yukon and $1,150,000 in the Northwest Territories for these objects. During the period 1957-1962 over $16 million was spent in the Yukon Territory and $20 million in the Northwest Territories, so it can readily be seen that the comparison between the two periods is quite startling.
The point I wish to make in connection with these expenditures is simply this, that
[The Deputy Chairman.]
whereas from reaching a point six years ago where virtually no development was taking place in these northern regions-which development, I submit to the hon. member and his colleagues opposite, is very, very beneficial to the future economy of this nation-there is now a substantial development taking place.
The Leader of the Opposition and other hon. members opposite have very often taken issue with the northern development policies of this government. The hon. member for Burin-Burgeo last Friday became quite emotional on this point and said that all these plans had been laid by the previous administration.
The hon. member for Richelieu-Yercheres has said this in the past, as has the Leader

of the Opposition. These hon. members have said that all the plans were laid by the previous administration and all that was being done was that this government was carrying them into effect. In effect they were saying, "These were our plans. We should get the credit for this. We are all for this road development program. We are all for the blossoming forth of the north as a resource reservoir for the nation.
I think these gentlemen should get together with the leader of their party, for I can recall that on several occasions in 1958 their leader ridiculed the plans of the government with regard to northern development. These hon. members ridiculed speeches which our Prime Minister was making across the country and which the Leader of the Opposition was ridiculing just as fast as he followed the Prime Minister's campaign trail across the country.
In Swift Current, on February 27, 1958, the Leader of the Opposition classed these roads as "roads from igloo to igloo". This is the famous "igloo to igloo" statement.
I am sure the Leader of the Opposition, as well as all hon. members opposite, will be happy to know that this particular road which was classed as one from igloo to igloo is now approaching the site of the first oil well which was brought in in the Yukon Territory in 1959; and another oil well is being drilled now in the same area.
I am sure, too, that the same critics of this road program will be happy to know that as a direct result of this program there has been discovered on the boundary of the Yukon-Northwest Territories, at a place called Flat river, the world's largest known tungsten deposit, a deposit which it is anticipated will be sufficient to supply the whole of the considerable United States' demands for tungsten, a very strategic metal in these days of space achievement and space striving.
I can recall another statement having been made by the Leader of the Opposition. This was in Vancouver on September 27, 1958, when he said:
Diefenbaker's promise of a billion dollar public works program in the Arctic is the phoniest promise ever made in Canadian history.
I think the statistics I have tabled will show that, far from being the phoniest promise in Canadian history, it has proved to be the most realistic achievement of any government in Canadian history.
Contrast it with an average annual expenditure of all federal government departments, for the period 1952 to 1957, of $46 million in the Northwest Territories and $36 million in the Yukon Territory. In the same
Supply-Northern Affairs period of years, 1957 to 1962, in the Northwest Territories $156 million will be expended; and in the Yukon Territory, $79,916,888, which is almost $80 million. Therefore when I said that all federal departments had increased their expenditures fivefold, I was not too far out in my estimation.
I wish to deal for a moment with the minister's announcement yesterday of the assistance program which his department is planning in the construction and maintenance of access roads to stimulate exploration, prospecting and development of the mineral resources of the north.
This is a very necessary policy which the government has very wisely adopted. This should be contrasted with the policy of the previous government, which was, "You show us that you have a resource; show us that you have an ore body that is worthy of development and we will build the road. There will be no assistance in road building until you can prove to our satisfaction that you have an ore body that has been proven."
Mr. Chairman, this is putting the cart before the horse, because in order to develop the resources of this vast area in the north there must be a stimulus given to exploration and prospecting. The only way that stimulus will come about is for the government to be interested financially in the field of resource exploration.
Before I leave the subject of roads, Mr. Chairman, I should like to remind the minister that he has a study under way concerning the all-weather maintenance of the Haines cut-off. I should like the minister to comment at some stage during the discussion of his estimates on the results of this survey, if they are yet available, because I believe the maintenance of the Haines cut-off as an all-weather road is essential to efficient resource development in the Yukon territory.
I should also very urgently press the minister to consider carrying out an engineering survey, and an economic survey which should perhaps precede the engineering survey, of a highway link between Carcross and Skagway. This has been discussed by many organizations in the Pacific northwest, not only in the Yukon, as an essential link in order to effectively develop the resources of the area.
The other matter I wish to discuss before I leave the subject of resources generally is that of changes in the Yukon Quartz Mining Act and the Yukon Placer Mining Act. As the minister has explained in the house on more than one occasion, the Canada mining regulations which were recently passed do not apply to the Yukon territory.
I well recall reading about the effort that was made by the previous administration to

Supply-Northern Affairs alter the Yukon Quartz Mining Act so as to include the power to make regulations under that act. The member for the Yukon at the time-the Liberal member for the Yukon at the time, I may say-moved that the bill which was introduced by Mr. Lesage not be read a second time. He was supported in that motion by the now Secretary of State for External Affairs.
I urge the minister, in considering any alterations to the Yukon Quartz Mining Act and the Yukon Placer Mining Act, to have the fullest and most complete discussions with the mining fraternity and the mining industry in the Yukon territory. Also, the Yukon legislative council, which speaks for the people there, as their own local legislature, is a competent body capable of assessing the effect of any contemplated changes in this legislation. It would be a very sad thing indeed if any move were made to alter these two existing pieces of legislation which now guarantee to the mining people in the Yukon territory a set of rules which they understand and to which they adhere in their efforts to develop mineral resources.
I want to say a brief word about tourism in the north and to commend the department for the large support which it is giving to the Klondike festival at Dawson city, a project which is being organized by the Klondike festival foundation at Dawson city, the main planning being directed by Mr. Tom Patterson who was the founder of the Stratford festival. The date of the Klondike festival has been set for 1962 and it is expected the event will double or triple tourist travel in this area of Canada.
I should like the minister to bring the committee up to date concerning the plans which have been evolved for the establishment of a national park in the Yukon territory. I know the department had plans and I know that the idea was submitted to the Yukon legislative council and has been considered by them, but I am not aware of the recent departmental thinking along these lines.
I feel, too, that the minister and his department should take the lead in the formation of a public utilities commission in the Yukon territory. I am not aware whether there is a public utilities commission in the Northwest Territories but I can tell the minister that there is no such commission in the Yukon. This has brought about a situation where there is a possibility of rates which are abusive being charged by public utilities in the area. I am not suggesting that this is the case at the moment. The rates charged by the electrical utility in Whitehorse have, indeed, been reduced recently but it is possible that if the minister were to use his good
[Mr. Nielsen.1
offices to encourage the establishment of a utilities commission a much greater control could be exercised in this regard.
Another area in which I feel the time has long passed for action concerns the establishment of a securities commission in the Yukon Territory so that these fly by night promoters will be precluded from forming spurious companies and selling spurious stock to unsuspecting buyers on the basis of resource developments in the north. I am sure all hon. members have heard of the famous Mr. Cal-dough who was extradited from England and who is now in Vancouver charged with fraud arising from the sale of spurious stock. It is interesting to note that Mr. Caldough's basis for the sale of these stocks was property in the oil development areas of the Yukon Territory. This is a very great omission in the Yukon. I think this is the only area in Canada which is now without the protection I have suggested.
These remarks conclude what I have to say concerning resource development in the north, and I am left with only one sector to cover. I should like to do this before the first item passes. It deals with human development. At the pleasure of the committee I will speak at another time on this item, or I can proceed now. I shall be about another 15 minutes.


William Moore Benidickson: The hon. member for Yukon always makes a useful contribution to our debates and I think this is the appropriate time to ask him a question. I did not do so while he was speaking. As I understood him, he began by saying, as the burden of his argument, that the new government was doing things in the policy field different from those which had been done by the previous government. In support of that contention I think he referred simply to the fact that certain items of expenditure have been greater since the new government took office. I wonder if the hon. member would indicate to us what new policies have been introduced since the change of administration irrespective of expenditure on old policies such as he was discussing?


Erik Nielsen: I should be very glad to do that. There are two important sectors, and the first one is this. Our future in the north is bound to be a mining future. I think that is agreed. The policy of the previous government with respect to development roads was this; "You prove to us that you have an ore body capable of being developed, and we shall assist you in building a road." That policy has been reversed and the government is now building roads into potential resource areas without requiring any evidence of there being proven ore bodies there. It is doing this in order to develop the area generally. It is

taking a gamble, whereas the previous government was certainly not taking any risk. The point I make is that the gamble has paid off, and paid off very substantially.


William Moore Benidickson: The hon. member has not said where. What about the Pine Point railway proposition?


Erik Nielsen: Well, that was, of course, a proposition which was thought of by the previous administration and it is now being built by this government.


William Moore Benidickson: It is not started yet and we have unemployment.


Erik Nielsen: There is no difference in basic policy there, because there are proven resources already in that area. But the hon. member asked me a specific question concerning a difference in policy. This difference is very real and it is producing real results because whereas formerly there was nothing spent by the previous administration on speculative roads, which is what they are, the country is now being opened up on a large scale. Of course, this government would have been in very serious trouble if this policy had not paid off. The point is that it has paid off as anyone with faith in the north would realize it must pay off. I am happy to say that whereas Canada did not produce an ounce of tungsten, for instance, except in very special circumstances during the war, a new tungsten mine will open up in the Northwest Territories in 1962 which will be the world's largest single supplier of this product. This mine was discovered as a direct result of the policy of road building to which I have referred.
With the permission of the committee I will pass very briefly to the last section of my remarks. I want to cover the sector of human development in the north. When the statistics which I have put on record in Hansard are read by hon. members it will be realized that in the field of education very substantial increases have been made in the grants for the establishment of schools and for participation in educational developments in the north generally. I am very happy to see that this educational assistance has been extended with federal concurrence to the field of separate schools in the north as well.
Great strides have been made in the field of housing. Just how great they are can best be realized if I tell the members of the committee that before 1957 not one single dwelling unit had been constructed in the Yukon territory under the provisions of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, not because the people were not there to build them but because the terms of legislation were unworkable. In 1958 there was one
Supply-Northern Affairs building, in 1959 there were 16 buildings, and in 1960 there were 32 buildings. There are some 50 to 60 buildings under construction at the present time. These figures point out very dramatically the strides that have been made in this regard.


William Moore Benidickson: There has been a 1 per cent increase in interest to the purchaser since the former administration.


Erik Nielsen: I am not an expert on interest rates as the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River is, and I should not like to get into an argument with him regarding rates of interest. I do know that where none were built before, we have now 50 units a year going up in that area.
The other matter on which I should like to have the minister give me current information, has regard to the scheme for the development of lot 19 at Whitehorse, and the establishment of a home builders' loan fund for the people of the Yukon territory who desire to build their own homes.
There are one or two other very brief items I should like to draw to the minister's attention. The first is a matter which I have been asked to present by the miners of the Yukon territory concerning the question of income tax and workmen's compensation. Recently the international union of mine, mill and smelter workers of the Yukon, local 924, made a certain submission to the Yukon legislative council concerning the reduction in income tax, or rather an increase in the basic exemption allowed under taxing legislation. These submissions resulted in a motion made in the Yukon legislative council during their last session to the effect that all bona fide residents of the Yukon in the single category, not otherwise subsidized by the federal government, be given an additional tax exemption of $500; and second, that all bona fide residents of the Yukon in the married category, not otherwise subsidized by the federal government be given an additional exemption of $1,000 on their tax; and third, that all bona fide residents of the Yukon building their own private residences be allowed to depreciate these homes as a deductible item in respect of their tax.
I know this matter has been presented to this house under the previous administration. The reason advanced in support of this contention, which I am very grateful to learn is favoured by the deputy minister of the department, can best be summed up from the journals. It is set forth as follows:
-that to encourage people to stay in the Yukon, to create the permanency of settlement necessary to the full development of the north, certain inequalities in living costs as well as housing facilities will need to be adjusted. The large mining companies recognize this fact and to an extent subsidize housing for their employees. The

Supply-Northern Affairs federal government also recognizes this added cost of living in the Yukon and subsidizes their employees by virtue of the isolated post allowance.
Then follows the resolution. I put this forward again for the minister's consideration, and perhaps the treasury board will take another look at the problem. I understand they have been the stumbling block in the past.
The question of workmen's compensation is a local problem but it is under the minister's jurisdiction in the sense that, as he knows, the same board that handles Yukon compensation cases handles the Northwest Territories compensation cases. For a long time the labour element in my constituency have been advocating a separate board for the Yukon territory so that claimants can be more expeditiously and fairly dealt with by a board which could assess claims on the spot.
I realize the committee has been very fair with me in allowing me to go over my allotted time in covering this rather large field. I should not have thought I would impose upon the committee to the extent I have, but had the hon. member for Mackenzie River been with us during the discussion of these estimates I perhaps would not have taken so much time. I have tried to be as non-partisan as I know he would have been, and I am sure he would support me in the submissions I have made concerning the Nothwest Territories in particular and the north generally. I should like to thank the committee for its courtesy.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. member for Yukon for his statement and would ask him if I am right or wrong in assessing his statement when I say that he has suggested the difference between the former administration and the present administration is that the present administration would build a road irrespective of the economic report, on the grounds of providing additional employment without regard to the existence of a mine at the end of the road, or whether the project promised success or not. Is that what the hon. member has said?


Erik Nielsen: Mr. Chairman, I have said quite the contrary of that. I said the former administration insisted upon knowing there was a mine at the other end of the road before it would even undertake to invest a penny in the project. For instance, I know that a submission was made to the former administration for building a winter road to the oil fields at Eagle Plain in the Yukon. This request was rejected because it was not in conformity with the policy of the former administration. In contrast to that policy the government is building a highway into this area which will carry all-weather traffic.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, I think you will agree that this has been a wide ranging discussion. As I pointed out in the brief opening statement, the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources covers a wide range of fields. On the whole the discussion has been carried on a positive note, for which I should like to express my thanks to all hon. members who have contributed to the discussion in presenting many useful ideas during the course of the debate.
I am not going to take up the time of the committee by answering each point, but I assure hon. members that every point that has been raised during the course of this rather wide ranging discussion will be answered in the form of a letter.
One of the recurring items in the discussion, and this is of course inevitable, has been the question regarding who is responsible for the present pace of modern development. I do not intend to become involved in this subject tonight, other than by underlying the fact that, as the new Minister of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, during the course of an extensive tour of all parts of the Arctic, which concluded last week end with a trip to the eastern Arctic ranging from Cambridge bay to Frobisher bay, I was tremendously impressed by the rapid pace of development and progress of Canada's Arctic. I think I should merely say that what I have seen has demonstrated to me, more effectively and dramatically than ever before, that Canada is a northern nation, with a northern economy and a northern destiny.
Fortunately, Mr. Chairman, a good many of the queries raised during the discussion have already been answered by the various hon. members who have spoken, and I refer particularly to the hon. member for the Yukon.
There was one particularly critical note during the discussion, and I should like to refer to it briefly in passing. I do so very kindly, because I am a teacher myself and I understand that when my hon. friend from Port Arthur made his references there was nothing personal involved. He is just one of those petulant pedagogues who view the scene from Mount Olympus which gives rise to the statement from time to time that those who can, do; those who cannot, teach. I do not agree with that statement because, being a member of the teaching profession myself, I know there are many in this profession who have made outstanding contributions in a practical and positive way as well as their contribution to the academic world.

Perhaps I have some helpful advice for the hon. member here this evening. I know there is nothing malicious or personal in his statements because in the current issue of Maclean's magazine he makes precisely the same statements regarding the group to which he belongs. I quote from page 26 the following words:
Fisher's own party has not been immune to his critical darts. Shortly after the C.C.F. and the Canadian Labour Congress got their new party project under way, Fisher calmly told the Ontario convention of the C.C.F. that the party's tactics had been stupid and its strategy bad.
I do not think the remarks in reference to myself were as pointed as these observations. The article goes on to point out the difficulty, and it is here where I wish to be helpful. I go on to quote the hon. member as follows:
All my life I've been searching for someone to look up to but my experience has always been to move from respect, almost awe, through understanding to a mild jeer. In the army, I thought I was involved in a great purpose, and then I realized that rank had almost no relation to ability. At university, I ended up completely disrespectful of most professors.


Mr. Fisher:: Mr. Chairman, far be it from me to rise on a point of order, and I appreciate this publicity but as to its relevancy to the department I should like an explanation from the minister before he continues.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: 1 shall come to that point in one moment. I continue with the quotation:
When I came to Ottawa, I thought I would at last find giants before whom I could stand in perennial respect. But I found no permanent idols here.
Therefore, if I could quote scripture, he has discovered that all his idols have feet of clay, which is the case in most human circumstances. But here is where I wish to be helpful, and here is where I become quite germane to the discussion under way. The hon. member was kind enough to make reference to a very important conference, namely the resources for tomorrow conference, which is scheduled for Montreal next October. I believe his was the only reference to the conference, and it provides me with an opportunity during the present discussion to underline the importance and the significance of the conference. He pointed out the fact that there had been a lack of suitable publicity. I hope this is not true because we have been successful in getting together a most qualified secretariat headed by a man of established reputation in the resources development field which for the past several months have been working early and late, in season and out of season, in order to get this conference under way. If there has been any neglect regarding publicity I think it might be on the part of hon. members themselves.
Supply-Northern Affairs
This parliament has a very important function and role to play in the promotion of the resources for tomorrow conference. There is no partisanship in this conference. It comes from the realization that the time is long past due when Canadians should get together the best brains, the people most qualified, and give serious consideration to the future development of our renewable resources.
The secretariat responsible for organizing the conference have issued bulletins which have been placed in the hands of all hon. members and if, as the hon. member for Port Arthur suggests, there are local publicity media in his constituency which have not heard of the conference I think it is easy to conclude where the difficulty lies. To the best of our ability and with all the means at our disposal we must all do our best to make this conference an outstanding success.
There is another point about the conference that I should like to mention. This is a cooperative venture between the federal and provincial governments. In planning for this conference there was no suggestion of precedence of one governmental level. It is a partnership among all levels of government. Those sitting on the steering committee are actually representative of the provincial and federal authorities, but also the municipal bodies have a responsibility in assisting in the promotion of this conference. There is no thought of a federal and a provincial conflict in this conference; it is a complete partnership all down the line, and this is exactly the way we want it to continue. Therefore, if my hon. friend is looking for a cause to pursue, looking for an idol, is in pursuit of the summum bonum, or the holy grail, there is something that he can give his attention to and in so doing make a contribution that will redound to posterity.
There was also some observation to the effect that nothing very much is going on in the north. I will not labour that point at all because what has been said in discussion already has more than refuted this point, but here is a field in which the hon. member for Port Arthur might be able to make an outstanding contribution. He is an educationist of some considerable repute. One of the programs that we are proudest of in the north is our rapid progress in education. Just three years ago 16 per cent of our own Eskimo children were in schools. Today that percentage has reached the 60 per cent level and we hope that within the next four years every Eskimo child will have the advantage of an education similar to that of any other Canadian child.
If as the hon. member for Port Arthur has indicated he does not feel he is making

Supply-Northern Affairs a worth-while contribution in the house, I should like to suggest that there is tremendous scope in our educational program in the north, and we would be glad to welcome him into our program when he retires from this honourable house. I am sure he would find that in the north there is a real challenge that would test the mettle of the best of us.
There was another suggestion that the work of the committee on mines, forests and waters has been an exercise in futility and that nothing ever emerges from the committee. I should like to recite briefly the recommendations that have already been implemented during the past three years as a result of the deliberations of the committee. Water problems have been dealt with. There were 11 main recommendations and all except one have been implemented. The Nelson river system study that was recommended is in process at the present time. The idea of a long distance national power grid is under active study at the moment. The field of water pollution and abatement has been dealt with in legislation that was passed in the house last fall. Various water development programs such as the upper Thames program, the Parkhill dam and Ausable river conservation program are in process, and just the other day it was my privilege to announce co-operation with other authorities in the metro Toronto conservation plan.
The new forestry department which was recommended by the committee is now a fact. Travel bureau activities have been expanded, as has been indicated by various speakers during the course of the debate, and this year we are opening a new office in San Francisco. The productivity council, of course, was also an idea that came out of the deliberations of this important committee.
I could go on with other points. There is just one more I should like to mention. The hon. member for Port Arthur quoted from our official bulletin to the effect that morale was in a rather low state in the Mackenzie delta region, but he did not complete the quotation. It is quite true that this has been one of our most difficult areas because of the lack of resources but it is also one of the most encouraging areas for economic development at the present time, and if he had been completely objective academically in his presentation to the house he would have read the final sentence which is in these words:
As a result, a program of Improved resource harvesting will be started during 1960 leading to a more effective use of fish and sea mammals, the production of locally produced dog food, a logging program for housing, and the development of handicrafts and fur garments for commercial sale in the south.
[Mr. Dinsdale.l
This program is under way at the present time. I had the opportunity of seeing it in operation when I was in this area during the Easter recess.
Perhaps I might refer briefly to some of the other points raised. I could spend a long time dealing with the points raised by the hon. member for Yukon. He is most knowledgeable in this field and many times I go to him for advice and information when we are considering the problems of the north. There are just a few references I should perhaps make. He raised a query about a statement I was supposed to have made on the prospects of a new province north of the 60th parallel. I should merely like to say that I agree entirely with the view he expressed. This depends wholly on the increase in population and on the rapidity of development of the economy of the north. I say that from experience because my own province of Manitoba was carved out of the Northwest Territories and had to await the influx of population after the construction of the C.P.R. and the resultant economic development before it could be declared a separate province within confederation. We are anticipating the same process in the north. How long or how short it will be will depend entirely on the rate of progress and development of that important territory.


Erik Nielsen: Before the minister leaves that point, may I say that he was fixed by the C.B.C. with a statement to the effect that he was advocating the joinder of the Mackenzie river district and the Yukon as a province. That is the point that has to be cleared up.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: From the standpoint of history and tradition and all other considerations that would be quite impossible because the Yukon is the Yukon and the Northwest Territories are the Northwest Territories and never the twain shall meet in interprovincial co-operation. Having been down north, as they say, I am quite aware of that. The hon. member made some reference to the Haines cut-off. I am happy to report that the study has been completed and will be in the hands of the interdepartmental committee very shortly. I also want to assure him that so far as any changes in the quartz mining regulations pertaining to the Yukon Territory are concerned none will be contemplated without the closest consultation with those who are connected with mining activities in the Yukon. Changes would only be made on the recommendation of those who are familiar with the situation there.
The question of a national park for the Yukon, as the hon. member no doubt knows, has been referred to the Yukon territorial council and the decision is now within the

hands of the members of that governing body. 1 think I shall leave his other points to be dealt with by correspondence and in personal discussion. I do express my appreciation to the hon. member for having brought these matters to my attention.
The hon. member for Kootenay West made some very pertinent points. I want to thank him for his kindly references to myself and I merely wish to say that we are interested in that favourite project of his, the S.S. Moyie, and are seeking ways and means to preserve this historic old relic. I could refer to other matters raised by the hon. member. We could continue our pleasant discussion as to who established sovereignty in the north but we can also carry that on in personal conversation.
I was very interested in the comments made by the maritime members who were most energetic and enthusiastic in presenting the viewpoint of that important part of Canada. If I were to refer to the remarks of each hon. member I am sure it would take more time than I have at my disposal tonight. I am fully aware that the maritime provinces have rich resources both from the standpoint of tourism and the standpoint of national parks and historic sites. We have various projects under way at the moment. That is my reason for making a tour of the mari-times this summer. There are so many new projects to be opened that I am going to spend at least a week touring the maritimes and officially opening the various projects that have been under way. I am sure that once these hon. members get me on site there we can deal with these matters personally and I do not need to take the time of the committee tonight dealing with them specifically.


Mr. McCleave:: Would the minister permit a question at this point? Undoubtedly he will be visiting the most famous and popular part of his historical empire, the Halifax citadel. Can he say how much will be spent on renovations there in the current fiscal year?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: There has been $1 million expended up to the present time and I believe there is an additional $150,000 earmarked for that site during the current fiscal year.
The hon. member for Grand Falls-White Bay-Labrador referred to the special position of the Eskimos in Labrador and I wish to assure him that I hope to come to grips with that problem just as quickly as possible. We have had conversations on this matter and I fully appreciate its urgency. I might also refer to what the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate said with respect to Terra Nova park. I shall be in Terra Nova during the tour and will see these things for myself at that time.
Supply-Northern Affairs
The hon. member for Nipissing spent some time discussing the tourist industry. I merely want to say in passing that we have no reason to be pessimistic about progress in tourism in Canada. Just two weeks ago I received the official statistics for the past tourist season and they indicated that, for the first time, the tourist industry became the second largest dollar earner in the Canadian economy. For the first time, the tourist industry was ahead of wheat. Newsprint was first, tourist receipts second and wheat third. Progress is being made so rapidly in this industry that I am convinced it will not be long until tourism will occupy first position. I believe the maritime provinces will be the area where this will occur first.
As a final word on this subject of tourism, I should like to say that the expenditure of the tourist dollar in Canada has been going up. It is true that Canadians have been expending an increasing amount of money in the United States as well. We cannot compare the two and say that the deficit has been increasing. This is a relative thing, and if measured in these terms, we have every reason to be optimistic.
I shall not enter the discussion about Cabot and where he first landed or who has priority in that respect. I will just make this comment, that after hearing the Irishman in full flight tonight, I can only conclude that the sweetest recollections of life are memories of things forgotten. This is the only comment I wish to make on this important subject here tonight.
Having covered these few points, Mr. Chairman, I shall let the matter rest. If there are any further questions, I am sure hon. members can raise them as we proceed to the various items in the estimates.


William Moore Benidickson: I have already indicated my high personal regard for the minister, who is a new minister. However, I must tell the leader of the house that we could not pass this item on the basis of the statement made by the minister that everyone would receive a letter with respect to the item he has raised in the debate on the estimates of this department. That is not the way we do business here. There are 265 members and each of us raises problems in which the other is interested as these problems are raised. When a question is raised in committee of supply and is replied to by letter, that does not satisfy the other 264 members of this committee.
We are getting very close to the hour of adjournment, and I want to suggest to the minister that he review, as ministers traditionally have at this stage, the problems raised and where occasion justifies he should

Supply-Northern Affairs reply as he did effusively to one of his colleagues, the hon. member for Yukon. Admittedly, this hon. member has a great interest in northern affairs. However, I think the minister should analyse, as ministers traditionally have, the questions that have been raised in the debate, not only today but on previous occasions. I do not care about the holy grails or anything else about which the minister was talking. I think a letter to one member of parliament is not satisfactory in most cases because all of us were aware of the question when it was raised initially and are interested in these problems. We do not know about them if the answer is simply made by letter from the minister after the administration item is carried.


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


William Moore Benidickson: Yes.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Does the hon. member's recollection go back to occasions when I was on the other side of the house asking questions of ministers who did not traditionally either reply to me in the house verbally or send me a letter?


William Moore Benidickson: Apparently I have the floor. The leader of the house was a very active, observant and critical member when he was in opposition. If he did not get a reply on any particular occasion, I cannot believe that he would not repeat the question in the future. My direct answer to the minister is no, I do not recall. If the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre at that time had pursued his request, then I cannot believe that parliamentary procedure did not give him the opportunity to get the information to which he was entitled. That is my point here tonight. I have great respect for the new minister, and I do not think this phrase is adequate in parliament, everyone will get a letter.
I believe in some cases when members raise certain points of local and minor consequence, they would be satisfied to get a letter, just as I am on occasion. However, this is not the general way of dealing with the administration item of the department, and I hope the minister will review the debate and check the problems that have been raised. If the minister replies, as ministers traditionally have, then those of us who are interested in the information will get it through the committee of supply. If a reply were made by letter from the minister the other 264 members would not receive the information.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member will recall my final statement. If there are any further questions, we shall be glad to deal with them during the course of the discussion. My suggestion with regard to the letters related to dealing with minor points. The reason I raised it was when I was in opposition it was a practice that was followed regularly in order to save time. We do not want to short-circuit the discussion. We will be quite happy to deal with matters of substance in verbal replies.


Douglas Mason Fisher: May I call it 10.30 o'clock?
Progress reported.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder whether the
house leader could give us a preview of what the government is looking forward to next week.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I am sure the opposition is looking forward to next week with the same interest. Tomorrow we will continue, and I presume complete, the estimates of this very interesting and important Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. We will then continue with the estimates of the Department of Fisheries.
For next week, Monday and Tuesday will be a supply motion. I think it is No. 5 in the list of supply motions. For the balance of the week, so that hon. members may make the necessary preparations, it is likely that on the estimates side the following departments will be before the house, national revenue, justice, mines and technical surveys, and forestry. However, I will give a more precise outline tomorrow of the order in which those estimates will come.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Does the minister think that is enough estimates?


Gordon Minto Churchill: With the desire of the house to complete early in June, I feel sure I should add another department to that list.


William Moore Benidickson: Veterans affairs.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder whether I could ask the house leader if he has any report about the railway situation?


Gordon Minto Churchill: No. I have just heard rumours; I have no official report.
At 10:35 p.m. the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to special order.

Questions
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS	outside printing contracts
The following answers, deposited with the Clerk of the house, are printed in the official report of debates pursuant to standing order 39:



AVERAGE PRICES, 1960, FOR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS

Mr. Boulanger: What was the average price obtained by farmers in Canada, for the whole year of I960, for wheat, barley, oats, flaxseed, hogs, and eggs?
Answer by: Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Agriculture):

Question No. 202-Mr. Pitman:
1.	Have the facilities of the Queen's printer been operating at full capacity from January to March 1961?
2.	If not, what are the reasons?
3.	How many contracts for printing have been let out during the period January to March 1961?
4.	What is the total value of these contracts?
Answer by: Hon. Noel Dorion (Secretary of State):
1.	Yes.
2.	N/A.
3.	1,409.
4.	$1,528,254.



AVERAGE WEIGHTED CANADIAN FARM PRICE

[Stage Direction]
Year	Product	Unit	PriceI960	... Eggs	$ .2981960	... Hogs	22.711959-60'	... Flaxseed	3.071959-60	... Oats for grain eastern Canada	.78western Canada	.63Canada	.681959-60	... Wheat eastern Canada	1.59western Canada1 2	1.19Canada	1.201959-60	... Barley eastern Canada	1.01western Canada2	.72Canada	.721	Crop year, August 1 to July 31. Since only about one half the 1960 flaxseed crop has been marketed and since only the initial payment has been made on the 1960 crop of wheat, oats and barley data for the 1959-60 crop year has been listed.2	Includes initial and interm payments. Some further payments may be made by the Canadian wheat board on the 1959 crop.
The average farm price for eggs are Department of Agriculture figures while the average farm prices for wheat, barley, oats, flaxseed and hogs are dominion bureau of statistics figures.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Items Passed
[The following Items were passed in committee of supply]:

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
General administration-
394.	Departmental administration, including fees for membership in the international organizations listed in the details of the estimates (also includes the national industrial design council transferred from the national gallery), $3,275,445.
Trade commissioner service-
395.	Administration and operation, $4,421,701.
396.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, land, equipment and furnishings, $105,000.
397.	Exhibitions branch, $1,241,309.
398.	Standards branch, $2,758,668.
399.	Dominion bureau of statistics, including the fee for membership in the inter-American statistical institute and a contribution of $500 to the international statistical institute, $12,596,591.
400.	1961 decennial census of Canada, $13,539,378.
B-National energy board-
401.	Administration, $544,970.
[Stage Direction]
Friday, May 5, 1961

[Stage Direction]
Tenth report of standing committee on standing orders-Miss Aitken.