1961-06-15

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. Earl Rowe (Dufferin-Simcoe)
presented the first report of the sessional committee on railways, air lines and shipping, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table copies in English and in French of the report of the royal commission on publications. Copies of this report are being distributed to members forthwith and released for publication. I shall not, of course, at this time endeavour to summarize or interpret the report, or give any indication of the government's intentions concerning its recommendations. However, I might say that the government is giving careful study to this report and its recommendations in the light of its objective to foster a sound and strong Canadianism.
The report speaks for itself and should be of the greatest interest to hon. members and to the public generally. May I also add a word of commendation to the membership of the commission. All members applied themselves with diligence and commendable zeal to the problem they faced and deserve the thanks of the people of Canada for the work they have done.



NORTHERN AFFAIRS


Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to announce that a well in search of oil and gas will be drilled in the Arctic islands this year. This is the first exploratory well to test this major northern sedimentary basin, one of the last great untested potential oil and gas producing basins in the world. The decision to commence drilling operations follows two years of broad scale geological work in the Arctic islands.
90205-6-402
The project represents an outstanding example of initiative on the part of private enterprise in Canada. The necessary capital has been raised by Dome Petroleum Limited on a co-operative basis. This investment under the leadership of a Canadian company in the development of our resources is an encouraging response to the government's program of northern development, and suggests that the recent amendments to the oil and gas regulations have had a beneficial effect.
There are many difficulties to be overcome, not the least of which is transportation. The drilling rig will be loaded on freight cars in Calgary to be shipped to Montreal. From there it will be transshipped to a freighter which will take it to the islands during this summer's shipping season. Depending on ice conditions, drilling will take place in the high Arctic on either Melville island or Bathurst island.
Oil and gas exploration in the north is now entering a new phase. Should success result from this first venture, it will be the first of many wells to be drilled in the islands and will mark the beginning of a new era in the economy of Canada's Arctic. I am sure that Canadians everywhere will watch the operation with keen interest.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Finance whether he can give the house an undertaking that the legislation referred to yesterday by him, dealing with the Bank of Canada, will be introduced before the introduction of the budget.


Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I do not see any reason why that legislation should precede the introduction of the budget. Hon. members opposite have been screaming for weeks now urging the early introduction of the budget. Now that they have got it apparently they want other business introduced which may have the effect of postponing the budget, because evidently they want to debate such legislation at great length.


Lester Bowles Pearson: May I just say that the minister's reply is both irrelevant and offensive.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Donald Methuen Fleming: I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, and the Leader of the Opposition that it was not meant to be irrelevant.


Lester Bowles Pearson: But naturally offensive.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT-INQUIRY AS TO REVISION THIS SESSION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Minister of Labour whether the amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act forecast in the speech from the throne will be introduced before the adjournment or prorogation of this session of parliament.


Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, that is a matter of government policy. As soon as a decision on that policy is arrived at, action will be taken and communicated to this house.


Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that the policy was announced in the speech from the throne, is the minister's reluctance now an indication that there has been a change of policy?


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, as I said previously, any decision on that policy that is made by the government will be communicated to this house. The intention of the government in respect to this matter will be made known.



THE CENSUS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, in reply to the question asked on Tuesday by the hon. member for Nipissing, as shown at page 6250 of Hansard, I have ascertained that in some instances a census commissioner may be required to enumerate people in the course of his or her duty as a census commissioner. As this is part of the duty of a census commissioner, he or she does not receive any extra
pay.
Mrs. Margaret G. Priest of 147 Riverdale avenue, Toronto, is the commissioner in census district 575B. Her son, Mr. W. G. Priest, is an enumerator in census district 575C. In the selection test for enumerators he scored 100 per cent. Another son, Mr. E. H. Priest, is an enumerator in census district 575A. In the selection test for enumerators he scored 96 per cent. Both these census districts are under other census commissioners.
[Mr. Pearson.)

The dominion bureau of statistics reports that Mr. G. W. Priest has finished his assignment and has been checked out by their officials, and his work has been classed as excellent. Mr. E. H. Priest has almost completed his assignment and his work has also been classed as excellent.


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Bonavista-Twillin-gate):: Could I ask the minister a supplementary question-


Mr. J. R. Garland (Nipissing):: I wonder whether I might ask a supplementary question.


An hon. Member:: Make up your minds.


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


John Richard Garland: The minister seems to be in a good and informative mood this morning. Would he confirm that this is the same Margaret G. Priest who is president of the Broadview-Riverdale Progressive Conservative Association?


George Harris Hees: Yes, I am very proud to do so. Mrs. Priest has the honour of holding that very distinguished and important post.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, when the hon. member for Nipissing rose I was also going to ask the minister a supplementary question and mine was, is this the restoration of the family compact in Toronto?



THE BUDGET


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Erhart Regier (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Prime Minister a question. I know the appreciation he has for what happens in the mother of parliaments. Will he admit that in yesterday's debate our Minister of Finance revealed the major aspects of the budget even though the details were omitted?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member's question did not seem to me to start out as one asking for information when he asked the Prime Minister to admit something. As I heard it, the question of what was said in the house did not appear to me to be an administrative responsibility of the Prime Minister.



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Finance

a question. In view of the fact that the Prime Minister was able to table the O'Leary commission report, which was received much later than the Bladen report, will the Minister of Finance now or before the budget table the Bladen report on the state of the automobile industry in Canada?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I think the question should come to me. Again I would say to the hon. member that it will be tabled at the time felt to be appropriate in the opinion of the government.



STRAWBERRIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Harold Hicks (Fraser Valley):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question about strawberries.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Address it to the government.


William Harold Hicks: This does not mean we are going to get some crates of strawberries. The question has to do with strawberries coming into Canada. A large tonnage of strawberries is being imported from the United States by local canneries. This will mean a cut in the price to local growers if it is not stopped at once. I should like to ask the Minister of Agriculture whether any action is being taken in connection with this matter.


Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, I just heard about the matter this morning. I am taking it up with the fruit and vegetable division and I should be able to have the information for the hon. member shortly.



INQUIRY AS TO SEIZURE OF EXPORTS BY CANADIAN CUSTOMS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lucien Cardin (Richelieu-Vercheres):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. I wonder whether the minister is now in a position to report to the house on the investigation the minister claimed was being made by the customs department into the seizure of 165 tons of spare parts and materials on board a ship destined for Cuba a few weeks ago?


George Harris Hees: I do not think I have received that report, Mr. Speaker, but I shall check up on it and give the hon. member an answer tomorrow, if possible.
90205-6-402i
Supply-Public Works DEFENCE PRODUCTION



TENDER NO. 43-1-1977-D    REQUEST FOR PARTICULARS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Richard Garland: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether in the absence of the Minister of Defence Production I might direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the assurance given to the house on Thursday last by the Minister of Defence Production that priority is given by his department, when purchasing, to goods made in Canada provided prices are competitive, can the Prime Minister say whether a price difference of $3.14 on a $600 item is sufficient reason to deny jobs to Canadians by giving the order for goods made outside Canada?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, naturally I would not answer that question in hypothetical form. If the hon. gentleman will give particulars of the specific contract he has in mind an answer will then be secured.


John Richard Garland: A supplementary question,
Mr. Speaker. In view of what the Prime Minister has said I wonder whether the hon. gentleman would be good enough to look into tender No. 43-1-1977-D, which closed on June 5, and give the particulars to the house.

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



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

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


Mr. Walker:: Mr. Chairman, I had almost completed my remarks last evening and was dealing with the trans-Canada highway construction program in the national parks. The section through Terra Nova will be fully completed during this year. A substantial amount of final paving is expected in the Banff national park, and a start will be made in paving in Yoho. In Glacier and Revelstoke national parks we expect by the end of the year to have a bituminous stabilized base course to provide a paved surface in both sections. The construction of snow sheds for avalanche protection begun in 1960-61 will be continued and, as you know, Mr. Chairman, this is a novel and large undertaking.
May I briefly summarize the work for the other departments. I went into the other

Supply-Public Works
matters in some detail yesterday. Hon. members will recall that when I introduced the department's estimates last year I mentioned a new departure, namely the planning and construction of embassy and chancery buildings abroad in co-operation with the Department of External Affairs. I know hon. members of the committee will be pleased that a further step has been made in this direction. We are now working in co-operation with the Department of Justice on construction plans for new buildings associated with certain penitentiaries in Canada. More and more the Department of Public Works is being used by the other departments of government for the construction of whatever buildings they find necessary, and a complete rapport exists among the departments in this connection.


Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: agree.


David James Walker: At least the Postmaster General agrees with that statement. We have been working with him for a long time, however. In 1961-62 the department expects to do a substantial volume of construction work for other departments using funds from their appropriations. On the basis of present information, 470 projects in this category are expected to be carried out for 15 other departments with a total expenditure in 1961-62 estimated at $37|- million. Some of them are new and others are to be continued from 1960-61. The larger projects in this category will be of interest to hon. members, and I will summarize them briefly. In other words, this is work outside the Department of Public Works, and outside what we would ordinarily do in the past.
Department of Agriculture: a science service laboratory at Vancouver.
Department of Citizenship and Immigration: a large number of schools and residences, including a school at Pointe Bleue agency, Quebec; hostels at Whitehorse; a residential school at Mission, B.C.; a school at Pelly agency, Saskatchewan, and a water supply system at Fort George, James bay agency.
Department of Fisheries: construction of several community fishing stages in Newfoundland; a gear research Laboratory at Nanaimo, B.C.; a workshop building at St. Andrews, N.B.; and conversion of the electrical system at biological station in Nanaimo, B.C.
Department of Forestry: a garage and oflice building at Quebec city.
Department of Mines and Technical Surveys: construction of the Bedford institute at Bedford basin, Dartmouth, N.S. and road construction at Victoria, B.C.
Department of National Defence: reconstruction of the jetty at Esquimalt, B.C.; reconstruction of a naval radio station at Inuvik;

repairs to the jetty at Patricia Bay, B.C.; and repairs to the fuel oil depot at Colwood, B.C.
National research council: communications laboratory building at Riverside drive, Ottawa, and applied physics building at Montreal road.
Department of National Health and Welfare: a hospital at Inuvik, N.W.T.; a hospital at Whitehorse, Y.T.; a nursing station at Habay, Alberta; repair of civil defence building at Arnprior.
Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources: large contracts for highway construction, other than trans-Canada, in the national parks-Banff, Kootenay, Cape Breton, Prince Edward Island and Yoho; a school and hostel at Fort Simpson, Northwest Territories; road reconstruction in the Yukon, on the Keno road at Whitehorse and on the Flat Creek-Eagle Plain road. In addition, a survey and some new construction will be undertaken on the road from Watson Lake to Ross. In the Northwest Territories, road work will be undertaken on the Mackenzie highway from Frank Channel to Rae, and on the road from Yellowknife to McKay Lake.
For the R.C.M.P., for which my colleague the Minister of Justice is responsible, a large number of detachment quarters are to be built, among them buildings at Queen Charlotte, British Columbia; Carmacks, Yukon Territory; Summerside, Prince Edward Island; Grand Manan, New Brunswick; Shelburne, Nova Scotia; Lillooet, British Columbia and Rock Island, Quebec.
For the Department of Transport the program includes marine agency buildings at Saint John, New Brunswick, and St. John's, Newfoundland; wharf and sheds at Corner Brook and Lewisporte, Newfoundland; work on the Toronto island airport and dredging at Cape Tormentine, New Brunswick.
For the Department of Veterans Affairs the program includes a therapeutic wing at the Shaughnessy hospital, Vancouver; a laundry at Ste. Anne de Bellevue, and a new hospital wing in London, Ontario.
I wish to thank the ministers in charge of these various departments of government for their complete co-operation in entrusting to the Department of Public Works so many important projects. I have outlined to the committee only the highlights of the department's work program. I know that hon. members will have questions to ask concerning individual items which are of particular interest to them and about which they may require additional information from me. I shall be glad to give them all the information I can at this time.

Finally, since I understand some hon. members are concerned about this, I can assure the committee that I feel very good natured today.
(Translation):


Mr. Bourgel:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to thank the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Walker) for the information he has just given us. It will prove useful, I expect, for the discussion that will follow.
I was glad to hear him say a moment ago that he is fully willing to discuss matters related to his department.
He realizes, I suppose, that since he has been Minister of Public Works, he often loses his temper. I hope that in this debate, he will manage to contain himself so that the discussion will be intelligent and serious.
I was somewhat surprised by the brevity of his remarks on the activities of his department. He is usually more talkative. He certainly has no reason to be, especially where the accomplishments of the government or his department are concerned.
I think I understand him on that point because ever since he took charge of the Department of Public Works, both activities and expenditures have been decreasing year after year.
(Text):


Mr. Boulanger:: Shame, Shame.
(Translation):


Maurice Bourget: As last year, I will limit my remarks to general observations and then add to them as each item is considered separately.
As in the past, I should have liked to make an analysis by using charts to show what percentage of the appropriations were actually used during the last fiscal year, namely 1960-61.
That would have enabled us to better appreciate the efficiency of the department during the past year.
These analyses showed that in 1958-59, the expenditures amounted to 89.5 per cent of the appropriations, while they amounted to 90 per cent in 1959-60.
For 1960-61, in view of the fact that the estimates of the department are being examined before the budget speech, it is impossible to make such an analysis, since we lack the required data, which are contained in papers tabled by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) when he introduces the budget.
It seems appropriate however to bring to the attention of the members of the committee the fact that during the current year, the number of unemployed reached a record percentage, that is 11.3 per cent of the labour
Supply-Public Works
force in February 1961. Yet this government, which advocated full employment and whose leader had said that no one would suffer because of unemployment, had requested for the Department of Public Works appropriations exceeding by only $7.9 million the amounts voted for 1956-57, the last year of the former administration.
This amount of $7.9 million does not include, of course, amounts provided for the construction of the trans-Canada highway, which are statutory expenses depending upon the activity of the provinces.
Thus I had every reason to say, as we have every right to repeat now, that there has been a reversal of the policy that the government was supposed to lay down, since it has renounced its famous public works program which was to supply jobs for everyone.
As I pointed out last year, if you analyse the estimates of the Minister of Public Works for the years 1958-59, 1959-60 and 1960-61, you find that instead of going up, as was the case under the Liberal administration, the expenses of the department have steadily declined from year to year. In 1958-59, expenditures ran to a total of $220 million whereas for the year 1959-60, the total was only $203.8 million. Finally, for the year just ended, we had been asked to vote $195.9 million including expenses for the trans-Canada highway, a decrease of $25 million in relation to the previous year. Under the Liberal administration, the amounts voted showed an increase every year, going from $37.2 million in 1946-47 to $147.5 million for the year 1956-57.
Last year, when these estimates came up, I asked the minister whether he could justify the fact that there had been such a drop in the work of the department at a time when unemployment was reaching alarming heights and when future prospects were none too bright. Here was the minister's reply, as recorded on page 6619 of Hansard for July 20, 1960:
The hon. member for Levis asked me why we cut $25 million from last year's public works budget. There are two reasons. The first reason is, of course, that in the two previous years, in an effort to get out of the recession, a great spending program, although a proper and well directed spending program, was initiated. It was felt that this could not be kept up forever and that it was a very good thing to cut back this year because we had hopes of having a very prosperous year and, aside from the unemployment figures, the gross national product is going to be exceptionally good.

Supply-Public Works
The minister went on to say:
As my hon. friend also knows, when the Minister of Finance made his budget address the hon. member for Levis was one of those who voted for a balanced budget. I am not always in favour of the suggestions made by the Minister of Finance. Sometimes we are at odds. Naturally, all the backbenchers are on my side because they want things X am convinced they should have. Sometimes I have to bow to the Minister of Finance and you are quite right when you suggest that.
At that point, I reminded the minister that he was forgetting the promises made in 1957 and 1958. Here is his reply:
Hon. members not only got promises, but they got results. The benefits of a balanced budget are obvious, even to my engineering friend the hon. member for Levis. I do not need to go into that. What would have happened in the country so far as finance is concerned? We have to have our financial institutions operating properly if we want to have business operating as well as possible. I need not go into that.
Indeed, Mr. Chairman, it was better at the time for the minister not to go into that, and I feel sure that when he is reminded today of the statements he made last July, he wishes he had never made them, because they were just another vision or dream that never came true.
The Minister of Public Works was at that time completely in error. I have shown a moment ago on the basis of statistics that the amounts spent by the Department of Public Works, instead of rising as should be the case in view of the fact that the expenses of the department should expand along with the development of the Canadian nation, have been steadily dropping since 1958-59.
This is why I say that the extensive public works program which we heard so much about has never existed except in the minds of government supporters, in spite of the goodly number of unemployed that kept increasing from year to year.
Moreover, I suggest that the prediction about the tremendous increase in the gross national product has proved altogether false, since the 6 per cent rise expected by the Minister of Finance reached only 3.2 per cent, or 2.1 per cent, if price increases are taken into account.
As far as the matter of a balanced budget is concerned, the minister must agree with us today that he was entirely wrong since the expected budget surplus of $12 million has turned into a deficit of almost $300 million.
[Mr. Bourget.l
I recognize, of course, Mr. Chairman, that a balanced budget has certain advantages. But, in spite of all their promises, did we have any balanced budgets since the Conservatives came into power? No, not even one. On the contrary, we had an uninterrupted series of deficits now exceeding $2 billion. That is why our country finds itself in a bad financial situation, the interest on the national debt is going up in a frightening way, the interest rates are prohibitive and our manufacturers, businessmen, workers and farmers find it difficult to borrow money. It is also because of the lack of action and foresight on the part of the government and the absence of any well conceived and orderly plans that we have today 700,000 unemployed in Canada.
Therefore, we have a right to say that the government has failed in its duty, that it is proceeding in a fog toward an unknown destination.
The minister also stated that he was not always in agreement with the suggestions of the Minister of Finance and that sometimes he had to give in to him. Then, how can he reconcile his remarks with what the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) himself said as recorded on page 3569 of Hansard for January 21, 1958, and I quote:
While next year we would unquestionably like to have a balanced budget, let me make it abundantly clear that we are not going to put a balanced budget above our firm determination to provide, through the agency of public works, jobs for unemployed Canadians.
I would then advise the minister to remind the Minister of Finance of those words when he has to justify his department's appropriations before the treasury board. Then, he will not have to give in to him or to give reasons which do not stand by themselves to justify his conduct.
Mr. Chairman, I should now like to analyse briefly the estimates for the fiscal year 1961-62. I say briefly because they are neither numerous nor impressive. We are asked to vote an amount of $166,548,544, that is only $2.3 million more than last year's vote.
On the other hand, if we subtract from those appropriations $2.7 million for the national capital commission which came under the privy council until last year, we find that the Department of Public Works' appropriations were, in fact, again

reduced this year by some $400,000. In other words, they are $25.4 million less than for the fiscal year 1959-60.
Incidentally, I should like to point out, Mr. Chairman, that this amount of $25.4 million is about the equivalent of the government's appropriations for the winter works program, which bring me to the conclusion that what the government gives us with one hand, they take away with the other.


Mr. Valade:: Who said that?


Maurice Bourget: By analysing the two major services, that is the one which looks after the construction, acquisition, maintenance and improvement of public buildings and the harbours and rivers engineering services, I find that, in the first case, appropriations have been pared by $5,447,000 whereas in the second case, they were increased by $3,558,000. In other words, appropriations for the two major services of the department have been cut down by nearly $2 million.
This year again, I would like the minister to give us the reasons for such a decrease in his estimates, when unemployment is known to be increasing, year after year. Is he trying to help the Minister of Finance balance his budget, as he said last year? He should then put an end to all expenditures, cut all building projects in his department, for if the experts are right, the deficit for the current fiscal year will be twice as high as that predicted for 1960-61. Or is it that the department is short of projects?
Yet the minister's predecessor said in the house on June 6, 1958, that he was going to have a reserve of public works to be undertaken on short notice. Where are those projects? Where are they? Is the reserve already depleted? Is the minister feeling tired? Or are the projects being kept for an election year?
I could easily, Mr. Chairman, point out a few to the minister that could be undertaken immediately and could even have been undertaken last year if the department had seen to it.
As a matter of fact, in the department's estimates for 1959-60, a sum of $600,000 was earmarked for the construction of a building in Quebec city for an unemployment insurance office there. Nothing has been done so far, except that the old hospital has been demolished.
Supply-Public Works
Last year, another amount of $500,000 was provided for the same purpose, and nothing has been done.
I then asked the minister why construction had not been started. He answered that the accommodation committee looking into this matter had needed time to decide if the building would house only the unemployment insurance commission or several government services. He added that the committee had settled the problem and that the building would only be used to accommodate unemployment insurance. Well, that was in July last year and nothing has been done so far.
Another item of $575,000 is provided again this year for the construction of that building. If the same eagerness is shown this year as in the last two years, I can guarantee that nothing will be done. I even wonder if the plans have even been started. If not, it will take at least five to six months to complete the plans and specifications, a month and a half for the calling of tenders and another month to consider the tenders and award the contract. That means that even if the plans were started immediately, actual work could not begin before the end of this fiscal year.
And yet, the minister has certainly not forgotten that when visiting Quebec in January 1960-i.e. a year and a half ago- he announced the site where the building was to be erected and said that $500,000 had been provided in the last estimates for that construction. His parliamentary secretary and representative for the riding was present. Unfortunately the Quebec East constituents are still waiting. They may find some consolation, however, in the fact that they are not the only ones waiting for this government to honor its promises.
Indeed, in the city of Toronto where the minister lives, construction of a building to accommodate unemployment insurance had been announced in the 1959-60 estimates. It was supposed to be erected at the corner of Dundas and Jarvis streets and $400,000 had been voted for that purpose.
I want to point out that this was another building to house unemployment insurance. And accommodation for that department is badly needed under the Tories because they have so many unemployed.

Supply-Public Works
Well, the following year, that is in 1960-61, the same amount of $400,000 was voted again for the very same building. And this year, we are asked to vote $900,000.
Now, on February 22 last, I put a starred question asking whether the plans and specifications of the Toronto unemployment insurance office were ready. The minister's parliamentary secretary answered as follows:
Mr. Speaker, the answer to this question is that it was originally expected that the plans and specifications would be completed by April 1, 1961. A basic change in the accommodation requirements has been proposed, and until this has been dealt with it is not possible to say when the plans and specifications will be completed.
That is another project for which we have been called upon to vote estimates for two years and a half and they do not know yet when the plans will be completed.
Surely, you cannot expect the hon. members of the committee to believe that during that long period, it could not have been possible to have the plans completed and the building started. Well, either they do not want the project carried out now or there is carelessness. The delay in carrying out that project cannot be explained otherwise.
The minister seems to be in need of suggestions about new projects the department would like to carry out. Well, I should like to make a very interesting suggestion which, I hope, will meet the approval not only of the minister but also of all hon. members, whether they sit on this side or on the other side of the house.
We know that, in Ottawa, the capital of this country, many conventions are held and that, unfortunately, there is no suitable building or local for that type of meeting. Since in six years from now, that is in 1967, we will celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Canadian confederation, would it not be wise to consider, right now, the possibility of erecting a federal building which might be used for that purpose and which, at the same time, could be considered as a monument erected in our capital properly to mark that important event in the life of our country?
Furthermore, I suggest that all provinces get together with regard to that project, in the sense that the name of each be given to one of the halls of the building.


Mr. Deschatelets:: Hear, hear.


Maurice Bourget: The minister could at the same time take the opportunity to organize a competition open to all Canadian architects. I

am sure they would be only too glad to cooperate to a project of such scope. I do not intend to say any more about that project for the time being, but I think this suggestion should be seriously considered by the minister and his officials.
And now, Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words about the possibility of building a causeway that would cross Northumberland strait to link New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island.
As all members of the committee, I noticed that in the remarks he made this morning and yesterday the minister had nothing to say about that important project which has been under consideration for four years.
Last year, on the discussion of these estimates, I mentioned a number of studies carried out by various government departments and firms of consulting engineers. I also pointed out to the minister that in my opinion with that data available the approximate cost of the project could be estimated so that it could be determined whether it was economically feasible or not. I added that studies and research in the future would affect only in a small way the estimate of cost for the project.
Later on, in the same debate, I asked the minister when he expected to be in receipt of a final report on the feasibility of that project, or when he expected the termination of research carried out by the national research council to ascertain whether this project was economically feasible. Here is the answer the minister gave me. I quote:
This week, the N.B.C. told us they hoped the results would be available next fall. As soon as possible afterward-
It is always as soon as possible.
-we shall decide whether the work is feasible and we will then be in a position to give a definite answer to the hon. member as to the total cost of the project.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I feel that after three and even four years of study, which cost almost $700,000, members of the committee, and particularly the public in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, have a right to know whether the project is feasible and what the government intends to do in that regard.
I hope the minister will make up his mind and tell us exactly what the situation is, now that the by-election has been held in Prince Edward Island, because after four years of consideration-and I repeat-after

expenditures of $700,000, we have a right to know what are the intentions of the government about that important project.
Mr. Chairman, may I now-
(Text):


Gordon Campbell Chown: Order. The hon. member's time has expired. Will the committee give unanimous consent to his continuing?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Maurice Bourget: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I also want to thank the members of the committee.
(Translation):


Mr. Chambers:: It is the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont (Mr. Deschatelets) who is in favour of it.


Maurice Bourget: In that case, I have unanimous consent.


Mr. Martineau:: You have at least one follower.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We are in favour of extending your speaking time and also agree with everything you say.


Mr. Ricard:: I am afraid he will shout himself hoarse.


Maurice Bourget: Mr. Chairman, my hon. friend from Essex East (Mr. Martin) says that he entirely agrees with me.
Mr. Chairman, I now come to the program for the construction of smaller post offices in some communities. The minister knows that the program was approved by all hon. members and that the citizens want those post offices in many places.
In 1960 and 1961, I received from two municipalities in my riding, that is St. Lambert and St. Louis de Pintendre, requests for small post offices in those two municipalities. I then referred those requests to the Post Office Department and to the Department of Public Works with the reasons which, in my opinion, could justify the departments to agree to them. Later, I received very polite answers saying that those two post offices were of the class called revenue post offices and that in those cases, the quarters were usually provided by the local postmasters.
I have no criticism in the case of the request from St. Lambert parish, for the revenues of that office in 1959-1960 were only $2,076.54, or almost $1,000 less than the required amount of $3,000, according to the information given to me last year by the minister.
Supply-Public Works
However, I fail to understand why the St. Louis de Pintendre request was turned down by the minister, because, according to the Post Office Department publication "List of Post Offices with revenues", that office's revenues in 1959-60 reached $3,411.23. Besides, I am convinced that there is just as much work to do in that post office as in others that have been built by the government under this policy.
I know from experience that it is difficult to grant all requests during the same year, but I think that if they meet the required standards, they should be granted even if construction has to be deferred until the next year. The municipalities concerned would then feel that they are all being; treated in the same manner.
Unless there are reasons that I am not aware of, I ask the minister to reconsider his decision on the request of St. Louis de Pintendre so that the citizens of that municipality may feel they are given the same treatment as those in other municipalities.
And while I am on the subject of small post offices, I would like to draw the minister's attention to the general appearance of the post offices built in recent years.
Members of the committee will recall that in May I told the house about the complaints of the population and public organizations of Rouyn, in the province of Quebec, about the drab appearance of this town's new post office building.
The following day, the minister replied that he had received the particular complaints and that the department would improve the looks of the building by the removal of a construction shack and the contractor's signs. He added that efflorescence on the brickwork would be removed and a general cleaning up around the building would be carried out.
You do not have to be an architect or an engineer to realize that the minister paid little attention to the complaints of the people involved, because otherwise, his reply would have been different.
The complaints made in the circumstances had nothing to do with the normal cleaning up job to be done after a building is completed. As I have indicated, they referred to the disgraceful appearance of the building itself, in other words to its exterior design, its architectural design.
Foundations had been laid, then a floor and after that four walls had been set up and a roof put on top. But no attention had been paid the building's architectural design, in order to make it attractive.
I hope there is no need to belabour the point. I am sure the minister, and particularly the officials of his department, know what I

Supply-Public Works
mean. I also hope that in the future we will hear no more such complaints, and even if it costs a few thousand dollars more to the government, I hope they will be spent, so that the municipalities may be proud of their public buildings.
The last point I wish to discuss briefly-I shall refer to it again when the relevant item comes up-concerns the trans-Canada highway.
At long last, after 11 years of waiting caused by the stubborn refusal of the Conservative government in the province of Quebec, a Liberal government has been elected to office in that province and an agreement has been reached on this highway.
That agreement between the federal government and the provincial government was signed on October 29, 1960.
For a period of 11 years, the late government of the Union Nationale had refused the benefits of this plan under the fallacious pretext that this project was altogether unacceptable and inconsistent with provincial autonomy. I may even go on to say that the great majority of Conservative members from the province of Quebec now sitting in this house supported the views of the late great leader of the Union Nationale. But now they do not utter a word. In their opinion, this project does not now infringe upon any aspect of provincial autonomy, probably because it is introduced by a Conservative government.
This 11 years of stubborn refusal has cost the province of Quebec millions of dollars-


Some hon. Members:: Shame.


Maurice Bourget: It is difficult to estimate the exact amount so lost, but I can say that a considerable part of the Montreal metropolitan boulevard, which will cost almost $130 million, could have been paid by the federal government. It is thus easier to see now that such stubbornness on the part of the previous provincial administration was most costly.
Some time ago the hon. member for Mont-magny-L'Islet (Mr. Fortin) put a question to the Minister of Public Works. He wanted to know whether the Department of Public Works intended to pay part of the metropolitan boulevard under the trans-Canada highway program.
He apparently was happy to hear the minister say that he would not pay that part which was built before an agreement was entered into by the federal and provincial governments.
I regret that an hon. member from the province of Quebec has put such a question to the minister, for I know that his intention was to say that Mr. Lesage-


Paul Raymond Martineau: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Chairman. I believe that you have allowed the hon. member for Levis the greatest latitude up to now.
However, it seems to me that, according to our rules, he does not have the right to pass judgment on the intentions of a member who voted for or against a bill.
The rules of the house are very clear on that point. I therefore believe the hon. member for Levis should refrain from passing judgment.


Maurice Bourget: Mr. Chairman, I am of the opinion that there is no point of order in the circumstances.
I simply noted that a member from the province of Quebec had put a question in this house concerning the metropolitan boulevard. Being a Quebecker, I was sorry to hear that question.
I have been a member of this house for 21 years, Mr. Chairman, and I have always asserted the rights of my province, without playing politics.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Chairman, would you give your ruling on the point of order I have raised, to the effect that the hon. member is imputing motives to other members?
I believe that the hon. member for Levis is out of order; besides, according to our rules, his time is up.
(Text):


Gordon Campbell Chown: We have under consideration the first item of the Department of Public Works. I have noticed that the hon. member has strayed on one or two occasions but has come back to the point. As I say, we are dealing with the administration item which is related to the forthcoming fiscal year, not any year in the past to which the hon. member was making reference, so I would ask him to co-operate with the Chair and endeavour to stick more closely to the item under consideration for the forthcoming fiscal year.
(Translation):


Mr. Johnson:: Tell us something about the Salvas commission.


Maurice Bourget: How that Salvas commission gets under your skin. That is why you have taken an injunction to try and stop it. The commission will keep on getting under your skin. There we see what has been happening for 16 years in the province of Quebec.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: The judges are also the
accusers.


Maurice Bourget: You see, Mr. Chairman, the respect they have for judges in the province of Quebec.
(Text):


Gordon Campbell Chown: Order. If the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm wishes to ask a question, then the hon. member for Levis who has the floor must be prepared to yield before the hon. member is entitled to ask his question. I have not noticed that the hon. member for Levis has yielded the floor.


Maurice Bourget: I will be glad to answer any question the hon. member cares to ask.


Mr. Pigeon:: It is a question of privilege.


Maurice Bourget: Do you know what a question of privilege is?
(Translation) :


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, the house
agreed-


Maurice Bourget: No, no. I allowed the hon. member to ask me a question, but-


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: The house agreed to allow the hon. member for Levis a few more minutes. But, as he is out of order, I object to his pursuing his remarks. Anyway, his time has expired.
(Text):
The Depuly Chairman: Order. Would the hon. member take his seat, please. If the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm has a point of privilege, I cannot hear what the point of privilege is if two members are speaking at the same time.


Maurice Bourget: I have only about 20 seconds left, Mr. Chairman.
(Translation):
Well, Mr. Chairman, I think we may conclude that people realize better today what the Union Nationale government cost Quebec. On the other hand, I rejoice at the thought that the Liberal government of our province will try to regain any lost ground by earmarking $50 million, for instance this year of which $20 million-


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order.
(Text):
Mr. Chairman, we are not at the moment discussing the estimates of the Quebec legislature, and that is exactly what the hon. member is trying to do. I submit that he is out of order and should not be allowed to continue.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: The usual small Liberal tactics.


Maurice Bourget: In so far as the point of order is concerned, Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member is not listening to what I am saying. I am referring to the program for the trans-Canada highway.
Supply-Public Works


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Stop playing in the farm clubs; you are in the big league here.
The Depuly Chairman: Order. To the extent that the hon. member for Levis is referring to the joint responsibility for the trans-Canada highway, he would be in order under this item. I would be obliged if he would stay closer to the subject matter under discussion, particularly in view of the fact that his time has been extended. Perhaps the hon. member could bring his remarks to a conclusion on that particular aspect of the subject as quickly as possible.


Maurice Bourget: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I do not like to abuse the rules. I would say that I am perfectly in order when I deal with that joint program and say that the province of Quebec is going to spend $50 millions this year and that, out of that $50 million, $20 million will be contributed by the federal government. Where am I out of order? You are a good lawyer, Mr. Chairman. You tell me where I am out of order.


An hon. Member:: He does not know.


Maurice Bourget: I do not know.
(Translation) :
It will be admitted, Mr. Chairman, that this is an excellent start which proves that the government of Quebec wants to give our province a highway system which will answer the needs of our people.
Well, Mr. Chairman, those are the few remarks I wanted to make under the circumstances. I hope my fellow members from the province of Quebec will have an opportunity of making themselves heard and expressing their views. I shall have the opportunity to say a few words when1 we discuss the various items.
(Text):


David James Walker: Answering the hon. member for Levis, as he asks this specific question, may I say that the average expenditure by Department of Public Works from 1945 until we took over in 1957 was $90 million a year. Since we took over the average has been $218 million a year. For the Department of Public Works and other departments for the period under the Liberals from the war until the Conservative party took power, the average was $109 million a year and under the Conservatives it has been $234 million a year. That is the answer to the allegation that we have cut down on public works.


Maurice Bourget: You certainly have cut down.


David James Walker: We have increased them by 113 per cent in our own department without any of the other work that we are doing for other departments. I do not want to engage in any controversy, because I am not in the mood for it. However, these are just some of the facts.

Supply-Public Works


Maurice Bourget: If the minister would look at the figures that appear in the blue book I think he would realize that since 1959, since he has taken over as Minister of Public Works, the estimates of his department have been going down. I said the situation was contrary to that under the previous administration. I have here the estimates of the department from 1946-47 to 1957-58. If the minister would like to have a copy I will give it to him, so he will be able to see that the situation was different under the Liberal administration. Even last year the minister himself admitted-and this admission can be found in Hansard-that the estimates of his department had gone down $25 million. That he cannot deny. He admitted it himself.


Mr. Herridge:: Speaking for this group I wish to make a few non-partisan and objective observations on the activities of our multi-use minister and his multilateral department. The scope of the minister's activities is really remarkable. Not only is he Minister of Public Works; he is the minister responsible for the activities of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I found out that he had also been the curator of a miniature art gallery on behalf of the people of Canada, unknown to himself. I now find that he is also custodian of the red carpet for this government. I discovered that fact quite lately. I am always interested in the scope of the minister's activities.
Before proceeding I wish to say that I understand that the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, who is one of the members for Halifax, usually warms up the minister's audiences when he visits the maritimes. It might have been a nice gesture if he had made a sort of introductory speech on the minister's estimates in order to excite or warm us up a bit. However, possibly that is not necessary in view of the furor displayed in the last few minutes.
I was pleased to listen to the review by the minister of the building activities of the department, of the buildings that are being built in the country and of the proposals for certain buildings at headquarters in Ottawa. I must say that this group is particularly interested to hear of plans for the commencement of a national library building. This has been advocated by a good many members in this House of Commons and others and we are very pleased to hear it.
I must say this, and in this respect I think I am speaking generally for the members of our group. We appreciate the minister's courtesy when dealing with representations made to him by various members, and his prompt attention to those representations. Whether or not he is successful, it is rather heartening to a member to have a minister undertake to

look into the question and give him a prompt and complete reply with respect to all these circumstances. We also appreciate his readiness to discuss even small problems that are brought to his attention in connection with his department. I also wish to express our appreciation of the attitude and the approach of the deputy minister, the senior staff in Ottawa and the district staffs throughout the country.
In connection with staffs I want to make two observations. As far as the professional technical and trained staffs are concerned, I hope their salaries are in line with the salaries being paid by private industry to persons performing the same type of service. I have had brought to my attention on one or two occasions in British Columbia recently instances in which we have lost extremely good men because private industry made them very attractive offers. In order to maintain the efficiency of the department I think the salaries of technical and professional personnel must be in line with those paid by private industry.
I have one other matter to mention in respect to men employed on public works contracts throughout the country. I think there must be a little stricter policing of the fair wages clauses of the contracts signed by various contractors. No doubt the labour department supplies the Department of Public Works with information as to the prevailing rates and the circumstances in any particular community. However, I suggest that a very close watch be kept upon contractors, under certain circumstances, in order to make sure they are paying the prevailing rates and that the working conditions are those accepted in the area in which the work is being done.
Another thing I wish to mention is this. I understand that under these contracts a contractor undertakes to engage, as far as possible, local labour. I have noticed a few cases in which the bulk of the labour-and I am speaking of circumstances within my own knowledge-were employees who came from the coastal area into the interior while there were men in the community, carpenters and other artisans, who were quite capable of doing the work. I can understand the need for bringing in certain supervisory personnel. However, I think the department must watch this aspect of contracts more closely than it has been watched in the past.
I understand the difficulties. District officers must depend upon correspondence, and the administrative staff is some distance from these operations in isolated and smaller communities. In this respect I suggest that it would be a good idea to ask the inspector or the clerk of works, as I think he is properly

called, to inform the department of the number of local persons who are employed and the number of imported personnel. I think the clerk of works on the job could keep the district architect informed of any particular violations.
We are very pleased to note that it is increasingly the policy of the Department of Public Works to undertake the greater part of the construction work for the government of Canada. That is a very changed situation compared with the situation of only a few years ago, when I think most of the outside work undertaken by the department was for the Post Office Department. I think it is an excellent development. It will add to efficiency and give some continuity to the approach of government toward public construction, and provide for the building up of an efficient and satisfactory staff instead of having pockets of staff in various departments concerned particularly with the construction of buildings and projects of that type. I think the present policy has been proven wise by results.
In this connection I cannot resist quoting briefly from an item in the Ottawa Journal of Saturday, May 13, which touches on this point. I think it deals with the subject very well:
Another feather in the efficiency hat of the public works department has been the decision to have it take over the architectural and engineering branch of the penitentiaries commission from the Justice department.
It was only seven years ago that public works built only for the Post Office Department, and, of course, took care of its own construction.
Now it's the builder for every federal department and agency except national defence and transport, and even for those it does all but the big basic construction jobs.
I endorse wholeheartedly the sentiments expressed in that item, and I suggest that the Department of National Defence, from my knowledge of certain circumstances, would save a lot of money if they let the Department of Public Works build their buildings from now on. I must say this all demonstrates that the minister and his officials are applying the principles of socialist planning to the operations of the Department of Public Works and that is why we in this group are so pleased with the purpose and activities of this department.
I have a few other suggestions to make. My remarks at this stage will be directed mainly to administration, but later on I shall have some more parochial comments to make on the appropriate items. One other suggestion I have is this. I think it would be a good idea if the minister found an opportunity to travel more than he does to various parts of the country. I know he is a very busy person, but I think his presence would
Supply-Public Works
be welcomed at outside points. I know it would in the Kootenays; we would give him a rousing welcome, as we do all prominent persons. But we see so few of them. The minister goes to Vancouver, spends a day or so with his officials there and drives around the city, but how rarely does either he or other ministers come into the southeastern interior. I do suggest he should find an opportunity to do that.
The same applies to the deputy minister. I think there is nothing like seeing the projects on the ground and the country in which the department is carrying on its activities in order to understand the local problems and difficulties. I suggest that more of that be done wherever possible. But even if it is limited, for heaven's sake let us have a visit from the minister or the deputy minister at least once in ten years in the southeastern portion of British Columbia.
With respect to the staff in British Columbia, I am a great believer in decentralization in administration and, as you know, in the southeastern part of British Columbia and in the Kootenays particularly there has been tremendous development. We had a very busy period in the early days of this century, when we had a district engineer and an assistant district engineer, who had a palatial boat and used to arrive in style at all the smaller places. Over the years the steamers disappeared and there was a certain stability, shall I say, in population and activity. But the area is now developing very quickly indeed with the expansion of the mining and smelting industry and the forest industry.
I have been asked to mention this by various chambers of commerce, business people and community organizations whose members are long time residents who remember the early days and are interested in future developments. We suggest there should be a district engineer living in the southeastern portion of British Columbia. There is more work to be done, and I think an engineer needs to live in a district in order to understand the circumstances which arise particularly with respect to rivers, waters, erosion, floods, local building conditions and other local circumstances.
I have been asked to bring this to the attention of the minister and suggest that it might be appropriate as soon as possible to have a district engineer responsible for the southern interior living in the southern interior, instead of him finding it necessary to come from Vancouver periodically to make a hurried visit to the district. There is nothing like getting the feel of the district and a knowledge of the people, and also belonging to certain of the local organizations in order

Supply-Public Works
to gain closer contact, appreciation and understanding of district problems and requirements.
Because of these recent developments I have another suggestion to make. I think there has been a bit of slackness in this regard both on the part of the Department of Public Works and the Department of Transport throughout the years. I should like the minister to tell us, when he can find time-I do not expect an early reply-how many complaints he has received from any officials in the last 50 years with respect to violations of the provisions of the Navigable Waters Protection Act in so far as they affect the responsibility of the Minister of Public Works. I intended to ask the Minister of Transport the same question.
These things were not serious years ago. People would drive piles without permission and string booms without permission. They would dump sawdust into our lakes, and it would go unobserved and unreported. I do suggest that because of the development which has taken place, in order to prevent the pollution of our rivers and the dumping of slabs and logs and things of that sort, the officials responsible should be told to watch carefully for any improper driving of piles or any improper stringing of booms and to make certain that saw mills-there are very few offenders in this respect-are not dumping their slabs into the river. I am not sure where the division of responsibility lies. I mentioned this when the estimates of the Minister of Transport were before the committee, and I mention it again now so the minister may consider just what aspect of this question comes under his jurisdiction.
I must say I read the annual report. You know, I am interested in public works. It is the sort of concrete subject that a simple mind like mine can understand. I am not much on the abstract art they have down at the national gallery, but I do know what a wharf is and what a highway is, or a building, and I must say that the annual report reflects the spirit of organized purpose which has been developed in this department since Mr. Winters took over as minister. That was the time when there was a change in direction in the administration of this department. I found the report informing, and the explanation of the activity of each branch and division interesting. The details are clear and understandable.
I am interested in knowing what is being done with respect to appropriate designs for public buildings. I mentioned this last year at somewhat greater length. Are competitions held? I am interested in the design of public buildings, and for this reason I should like the minister to tell the committee what the

policy is in this regard. The smaller buildings are, I think, most suitable and attractive; the smaller post offices and R.C.M.P. buildings, for example. They are generally appreciated through the country, and there are many favourable comments.
However, I do not see any definite policy with respect to the design of the larger buildings to the end that when you go into a city you will know that certain buildings have been built by the federal Department of Public Works, buildings which are not only functional but which are attractive to look at as well. I should like the minister to tell us what is the policy with respect to the design of public buildings, particularly the larger ones, and also what is the policy with respect to air conditioning in federal buildings. I think air conditioning is very necessary in Ottawa and it is necessary, also, in some other points throughout the country, particularly in the larger buildings.
Then I should like him to tell me what the policy is with respect to the administration of public buildings. Take the example of a building occupied mainly by the Post Office Department, with the offices of four or five other branches of the federal government located in the same building. Who is responsible for the administration of that building? Suppose there is a parking lot available, who should have the right to say that certain cars shall be parked there and certain cars shall not be allowed to park there, and so on? This is a problem that has created a little fuss and furore on one or two occasions, because apparently there is not a clear line of responsibility. At times the janitor in charge of a building has fought with another official of the Department of Public Works who claimed he had the first right to park his car in a specific area and the postmaster had to take his car around to the back door. I feel that individuals in charge of buildings should be informed as to who is responsible, on the spot, for the administration of these buildings and the decisions as to what preferences exist for the parking of cars and so on.
In regard to designing policy, I should like to know whether certain architects are studying this question, and whether at any time there is consultation with the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada as to a policy respecting the design of public buildings. I should also like to know whether any competitions are being held or are anticipated regarding suitable designs for public buildings.
I have one or two other matters to mention, following which I shall have practically completed my few remarks on the administration item. Last year I made a plea for

the rehabilitation of lover's lane between the back of parliament hill and the Ottawa river; not that 1 have any particular interest in or use for this area, but as it is now it is a very unsatisfactory view for anyone travelling along the Ottawa river by boat.
At the time I mentioned this situation last year the minister stated that he would give the question consideration, and I should like him now to tell this committee what consideration has been given to clearing up this rather unsightly area in order to make it available for people who wish to legitimately enjoy it. I am of the opinion that this project would not cost a great deal of money, although there are certain walks and rails which would have to be repaired and put back into proper condition, and I cannot understand why there is so much hesitation in improving the area.
I have another query with respect to what I am pleased to term "operation statues and lemon juice". I brought this matter to the attention of the minister last year, after the department started a program of rubbing the statues, beginning with that of D'Arcy McGee, with lemon juice, I believe. In this regard I should like to read an article which appeared in the Toronto Globe and Mail of June 3, 1960. When I raised this question in the committee last year I received a report that this most unusual operation was proceeding satisfactorily. I later received a letter to the same effect. The article to which I have made reference reads as follows:
Ottawa, June 2-Satisfied with the scrubbing job on D'Arcy McGee and the fair maiden they call Mollie, senior officials of the Department of Public Works have given permission to clean up the remaining eight bronze statues on parliament hill.
The father of confederation, standing on a concrete pedestal, with the buxom Mollie draped at his feet, was recently given a test bath. McGee was chosen because he is at the rear of the centre block, hidden from most of the tourists. Had the test failed it would not have been noticed as readily as the others.
A scrubbing crew removed years of grime from the statue and then rubbed McGee and Mollie with lemon oil.
"We've been trying to get them the colour of a Sam Browne belt,"-
That is a peculiar Sam Browne belt colour which exists there now. The article then continues:
-a department official said.
Mollie is well browned all over, but McGee's bronze locks have turned grey. The officials said they have yet to touch up McGee's hair.
Throughout the summer, work crews will concentrate on the remaining statues, including former prime ministers Borden, Laurier, Macdonald, Mackenzie, Lafontaine and Baldwin, Queen Victoria, George Brown, another father of confederation and founder of the Globe, and explorer Jacques Cartier.
Mr. Chairman, I have made periodic visits along with other individuals interested in
Supply-Public Works
this project, and have noticed that only one statue has been tackled. I think anyone, in fairness, will say those which still retain their original patina are much more attractive than the statue of McGee and Mollie with the verdigris showing them in a most dilapidated condition. I think Mollie's complexion is really out of this world.
In view of the comments made last year and the information I received from the minister at that time as to the success of this very interesting project, and in view of the report appearing in the Globe and Mail in regard to the appearance of that lone statue in question which the department has scrubbed and rubbed, I should like the minister to inform me what is the policy of his department in respect to this operation.


Mr. MacLean (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Chairman, this is the first time I have spoken in committee since your appointment, and I should like to take advantage, at the outset, of the opportunity to congratulate you in respect to this very high appointment. I do so as one Manitoban to another.
I have a very few brief remarks to make to the minister and his officials this morning, and I hope he will forgive me if I become a a little parochial, inasmuch as I may not be here later on in the day, in making suggestions regarding two or three matters of importance at the present time to the people of the city of Winnipeg.
I believe the minister is aware of the fact that at the present time the Red and Assini-boine rivers which flow through the city of Winnipeg are at very low and dangerous levels, and that the water pollution at the present time in the city of Winnipeg has become very dangerous. There is no effective treatment unit to remove the sewage from these two rivers, and because of the low rate of flow there is a very great possibility of the spread of bacteria followed perhaps, by sickness.
There has been some discussion about the locks at Lockport lower down the river, which were used some months ago and perhaps are still being used to increase the rate of flow so as to raise the level of the water in the rivers at the city of Winnipeg. If at all possible I should like some information from the minister or his officials in this regard.
In addition to that suggestion, but having regard to the sewage treatment unit, I understand that at the present time the city of Winnipeg and the metropolitan council of greater Winnipeg are making application to the minister and his department in relation to the financing of these units, by virtue of the amendment made last fall, under the

Supply-Public Works National Housing Act. When these applications are received I should like them to be given high priority and consideration so that these facilities may be installed at the earliest possible opportunity.
The next subject I wish to refer to, which is of great interest to our senior citizens of the city of Winnipeg, has regard to the expansion of housing facilities for our elderly people. I am sure the minister is aware of the great work done in Winnipeg by the age and opportunity bureau, and will remember receiving a brief from that association with respect to an amendment to the National Housing Act to increase the provision of housing facilities for our senior citizens through Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
This organization has made a comprehensive survey of the existing needs of our elderly citizens for increased housing facilities in the city of Winnipeg. Perhaps I may just take a moment or two to place on the record two or three points made manifest by the study carried out by this excellent organization. First of all it discovered that old age assistance and old age pensions are the main source of income of a large percentage of aged persons. They found that those who need accommodation most cannot afford to pay the rent being charged aged persons in limited dividend housing projects provided under existing legislation. They found that the existing regulation for the accommodation of single aged persons is not realistic in that it is impossible to provide the required standards of accommodation at rents compatible with their incomes. They also found that single aged persons constitute a majority of the population over 70 years of age, and that single aged persons cannot live in those units.
I am not going to deal with this matter at great length. The minister has full knowledge of my views and my interest in the matter, and the fact that something should be done with regard to amending or expanding section 16 of the National Housing Act to provide for some type of accommodation which would cover those people. The accommodation would be the hostel type which at the present time is not included under the National Housing Act.
This is not a situation which is signally evident only in the city of Winnipeg. From the information I have I would say that it exists in the larger cities right across Canada. I wonder whether perhaps for a start the minister might take into consideration the appointment of someone-not necessarily from C.M.H.C.; perhaps someone from the Canadian welfare council-to make a study in the


larger cities across Canada to see if the National Housing Act is providing adequate housing facilities for our senior citizens, and whether the hostel type of accommodation is the solution to the problem, if those facilities are not adequate at the present time. I believe most of this information is available now. On the basis of the report on such a survey I think it would become only too apparent that the need is not being fulfilled and something should be done about it. Perhaps the time has come, Mr. Chairman, to give consideration to applying one section of the National Housing Act, or indeed introducing a special act, to housing for aged and senior citizens. This might cover people over 60, 65 or 70 years of age.
I will not dwell any longer on this subject, inasmuch as the brief and the views of the aged and opportunity bureau and myself have been distributed among hon. members. The minister was kind enough to receive the brief, sit down with me and other interested members and explain to us the present provisions of the act and the fact that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation itself, the government and his officials are always interested in looking into things of this sort. I hope he takes heed of what I have said today and perhaps takes a longer look at it.
I might move on to my third and last point, which has to do with slum clearance and urban redevelopment in the city of Winnipeg. Hon. members know that a few days ago I had the special privilege of looking at the Mulberry housing project in the city of Halifax. I was happy to have the opportunity to go down and see it. When I saw it I was astounded to realize that in the city of Winnipeg we probably have some of the worst housing conditions to be found in any of the major cities across Canada. Yet for the last three and a half or four years the city council of Winnipeg has done nothing approaching the Mulberry project in the city of Halifax. The Mulberry project contains 348 units and I am told it will house around 1,500 persons. A project of this kind could be used in the city of Winnipeg at the earliest possible moment.
I am told by the minister and by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation that they are ready, willing and only too eager to get going on the same sort of project for the people in those areas in the city of Winnipeg where more adequate housing and redevelopment are needed. I am sure such a project would bring new business and provide greater economic opportunity for the depressed slum areas. I trust the offer still stands. I should

like to receive the assurance from the minister that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and his officials are interested in this problem. Perhaps he could bring us up to date on just what progress is being made in the city of Winnipeg in regard to this matter.


John Richard Garland: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few remarks this afternoon on one of the divisions of the department which comes under the jurisdiction of the minister. I hope to be as objective as possible. I wonder whether you would 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 Richard Garland: Mr. Chairman, perhaps my first words should be words of congratulation to you, sir, on your recent appointment, one that I feel is very well deserved and which I am sure you welcome as another opportunity for service.
In order to appreciate fully the situation in which the housebuilding industry and the government find themselves today, I believe it will be very helpful to review very briefly government activity in this field in the past year. It will be recalled that during almost the first half of 1960 housebuilding had virtually collapsed as the result of government policy. The annually adjusted rate at that time, I believe, averaged something in the order of 60,000.
First there was the reluctance of the government approved lenders to put their money into long term mortgages when more attractive terms and rates were available elsewhere. It will be recalled that the banks stopped lending. The fact that more attractive interest rates and better investment opportunities were available caused the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Finance to say that these institutions were abdicating their social responsibilities. Yet it was the government's monetary and fiscal policies that had resulted in these higher interest rates throughout the economy.
Further, it will be remembered that during this very period when the approved lenders drastically reduced their lending on housing and the banks refused to lend, the government decided to cut in half the amount it had made available for direct lending during the previous year. Despite the fact that the then minister of trade and commerce had indicated that there would be 140,000 starts in 1960, and the Minister of Public Works at that time forecast 125,000, the government announced
Supply-Public Works
its intention to reduce from $330 million odd to $175 million the money it would make available for direct lending in 1960.
It was hoped-and they had the benefit of good advice, of course-that construction in other fields would take up the slack, but the fact of the matter is that it did not. Therefore at a time when mortgage money could scarcely be found from normal sources, the government sliced in half its lending activity. Little wonder that we ended up the year with 108,000-odd starts. Little wonder that this year, when housebuilding is showing some signs of recovery toward a volume that we might normally expect, the minister is able to stand up and announce increases over last year's depressed figures. But these announcements by the minister only tell part of the story. Despite the minister's fine words, and despite the artificial stimulation that has been given to housing by government legislation, starts have been actually declining since February. I have here the latest figures that are available to me, the dominion bureau of statistics figures for June 7. These are the seasonally adjusted rates: February, 119,000; March, 110,000; April, 90,000.
Hon. members will also realize that more than a shortage of mortgage funds developed in the housebuilding industry last year. During the last half of the year there was a great shortage of buyers which resulted from the overexpansion and overstimulation of the housebuilding industry by the government during 1958 and 1959. Further, I believe that during 1960 and again this year there was and is a growing awareness on the part of the buyers of the tremendous burden of high interest payments at today's 6| per cent rate, which we all know is the highest interest rate in the history of the National Housing Act.
Certainly the government cannot blame the governor of the Bank of Canada for this rate, which was set by the government itself. It is little wonder, then, that the government was desperate last fall in an attempt to find ways and means to get the housebuilding industry back on the rails. It is little wonder that they found it necessary to introduce amendments to existing legislation during the last quarter of the year, and particularly the changes in December.
May I say at once, as I said at the time the legislation was before us in the house, although it was a year too late, to the extent that it increased housebuilding it was welcome. We also recall the imposition of the ceiling on wages. Finally the government raised the ceiling on wages, and then removed it. However, I am not going to go into all these things now.
6382	HOUSE OF
Supply-Public Works I have referred to these activities of the government during the past year or more in order to point out the power of the federal government in this field. The results of the past 17 months have clearly shown the degree of control over housing that can be exercised by any federal government. Where it would appear that total activity might lag, housebuilding can be stimulated. Where it appears that total activity in the economy is straining our total resources, steps can be taken to curtail housebuilding. The degree to which this stimulation or curtailment might be applied is, of course, highly debatable. The power of our federal government to control the rate of housebuilding comes largely from its control over the N.H.A. mortgage market. It controls the supply of mortgage funds by making N.H.A. mortgage rates attractive or unattractive to private lenders by varying the volume of its own lending.
It has been clearly shown in recent years that the volume of housebuilding responds very quickly to changes in the quantity, availability and of course the terms of N.H.A. mortgage money. Restricting housebuilding in times of prosperity while stimulating housebuilding in times of recession is splendid in theory. The difficulty lies in the policy of attempting to produce total stability by deliberately creating instability in housebuilding. These violent fluctuations are indeed costly to the industry and of course ultimately to the purchaser. When the housebuilding industry is overstimulated, inefficient, inexperienced people are attracted into the industry. They often produce homes that regardless of their price, are expensive.
However, it is not this particular aspect of the high cost of housing that I want to pursue here, Mr. Chairman. As I mentioned earlier, today's main deterrent is not the scarcity of mortgage funds but rather the high cost of mortgage funds. In an earlier debate I dealt in some detail with this 6f per cent N.H.A. rate. Suffice it to say today that a person buying a $15,000 home over a 35 year period will pay $22,476 in interest. If the average age of a purchaser under N.H.A. today is slightly over 35 years, he will pay $37,754 for a $15,000 house, will be collecting his old age security pension and may well have his house fall down before the final payment is made.
I would ask hon. members to compare the interest payments made on a specific amount over a period of time at 6J per cent as compared to 54 per cent. I point out that on a $12,000 mortgage amortized over a 30 year period, there is a difference of $4,056. I point out further that the monthly payment for 

this amount of money and for this particular term at 54 per cent, is $65.85 as against $77.10 at a 6f per cent rate.
I remind hon. members of the F.H.A. rate in the United States, which is 54 per cent. I remind hon. members also that N.H.A. rate was 54 per cent under the Liberal administration in 1954, during a period of mild recession. I appeal to the government again, as I have tried to do for the past year, urging them to reduce at once this 6J per cent N.H.A. rate. What possible justification can there have been during the past year of recession and during a period when three quarters of a million people were unemployed, for maintaining this unnecessarily high N.H.A. interest rate? I hope now that we see signs of a professed change of heart on the part of the government, that there will be early action in this regard.
Surely, Mr. Chairman, the government must be aware of their responsibility in monetary and fiscal matters. Let us just for a moment take a peek at how the young, aggressive administration south of the border tackled this matter immediately after taking office. They had inherited a similarly stagnant situation from the previous administration. I should like to refer very briefly to some quotations. The first is from the New York Times of February 28:
United States acts to cut mortgage rates
The government started a direct and high powered effort today to bring down mortgage interest rates.
The same article continues:
The administration's first move was a package of stimulants through federal housing program channels. The most prominently noted part of that package was a reduction of the permissible maximum for rates on mortgages insured by the federal housing administration-to 5J from 52 per cent.
In the Ottawa Citizen of March 15 we find this:
United States driving to lower interest on mortgages
The Kennedy administration is intensifying its campaign to drive down mortgage interest rates. Home owner's borrowing costs have been edging lower but the decline has been too sluggish to satisfy top officials.
In the New York Times of May 22 we find this:
Mortgage rates are moving down
A new phase of the administration's efforts towards lower mortgage interest rates has started bearing fruit already. Another step is under serious consideration.
The Montreal Star of May 27 has this to say:
Kennedy cuts mortgage rates.
That article covered the announcement by the administration of a reduction from 5 J per cent to 5J per cent in interest rates. Surely

the most important component of the real cost of housing is the cost of money. A reduction of only 1 per cent in the interest rate would have more impact on the annual cost of a house than any conceivable improvement in technology. This government should carry out its debt management policy and its monetary policy in such a way as to create the proper kind of economic climate for capital expenditure and investment in housing.
Mr. Chairman, at this point I should like to say a few words concerning the proposed secondary mortgage market. It will be recalled that for the past three years we on this side of the house have recommended the establishment of an effective secondary mortgage market. I can recall that on at least three occasions. I spelled out in some detail my version of one effective phase of a secondary mortgage market. I referred to an institution that would purchase N.H.A. guaranteed mortgages and use them as collateral against the issuance of certificates in small denominations that would be made available to a new type of investor in housing, the small investor. To the extent that this would attract new investors into the mortgage lending field, it would be effective. However, at no time did I envisage the government unloading long term mortgages at discounts that would have the effect of earning handsome profits for the purchaser at the expense of the taxpayer.
Now, I know the Minister of Public Works will say that this is not the case. It should be noted that in his statement to the house on April 17, this matter was not covered. But in a press release outside the house it apparently was stated, as reported in the press throughout the country, that there would be no loss because the money from the sale of these mortgages would be reinvested at these abnormally high rates. Since that time the minister, in response to questions of mine, has refused to say how much of this money will be reinvested.
There is the picture. After a favourable press release, we have silence on this point. I am watching with considerable interest, therefore, the action of the government in this offering of a $15 million nibble which is currently being made. It will be interesting to note the price at which they will be prepared to pass on to the purchasers these $750 million worth of mortgages-


Mr. Graffley:: Will the hon. member inform the committee from what document he is reading?


John Richard Garland: Mr. Chairman, I hear a series of squeaks.
Supply-Public Works


William Heward Grafftey: You hear a question being asked. You were reading from a document.


An hon. Member:: Sit down; you're rocking the boat.


John Richard Garland: Perhaps I should say it was
a squawk.


William Heward Grafftey: You hear a question.


An hon. Member:: Don't take yourself so seriously. Nobody else does.


John Richard Garland: I hear squawking from Brome lake. I was under the impression that the Brome lake area produced better ducks than that.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Chairman-


Mr. Harkness:: I rise on a point of order. The hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi has raised a point of order which I think should have been raised at least 10 minutes ago. The hon. member for Nipissing has been reading his speech, every word of it-I have been watching him closely-for the last five or ten minutes. This procedure, of course, is directly against the rules of the house.


Maurice Bourget: So did the minister.


Douglas Scott Harkness: As the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi has raised the matter, instead of him being abused for doing so I think the rules should be observed.


Mr. Winch:: May I add a word here on the point of order. I think I can do so because I never read a speech; I speak extemporaneously. I want to tell the hon. member who has just spoken that almost every speech made from the government side of the house is read. If he wants that rule enforced, as I think it should be enforced, inasmuch as he has raised the point I intend to challenge everyone on the government side henceforth who reads his speech, and 95 per cent of the speeches made from his side of the house are read.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Chairman, I raised the point of order. The hon. member who has just spoken was not speaking to the point of order; he was making an attack on unspecified members on this side of the house. The point of order having been raised by the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi, I think it should be dealt with.


Mr. Caron:: While we are on that point of order may I say this, being one of those who never reads a speech. It might be better if I did so. However, I maintain that this is something that has been done over the years from the beginning of the House of Commons. I think it is an advantage to those who are
6384	HOUSE OF
Supply-Public Works
listening when a speech has been well prepared. Just because it is foolishly provided in the rules that nobody should read a speech, I can say this. If the rule is enforced today, as has been requested by the minister, he will be obliged to sit down for quite a while, because I will watch him and I will watch other ministers, even the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister, when they read from this time forward.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: I want to speak on this point of order. The point has been raised with regard to the identification of a document from which the hon. member was reading. We should not allow ourselves to be diverted from the question. The hon. member was asked to identify the document from which he was reading. With all deference to your authority, Mr. Chairman, I think you should enforce this rule.


Gordon Campbell Chown: I have no difficulty in identifying the document to which the hon. member is referring. I can only presume that they are notes he has prepared for giving his discourse on item No. 1 of the estimates. Inasmuch as he is the official opposition critic of the department under consideration, and because I was watching him very closely and observed that he spoke extemporaneously on several questions apart from the notes he had, I do not think I should do other than caution him not to read, as I would have to caution other members of the committee, on a regular basis; and in the interests of proceeding expeditiously with this item of the estimates I think we should allow the hon. member to have the floor.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a question of privilege.


Mr. Habel:: Are you appealing his decision?


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Sit down; he is raising a question of privilege.


William Heward Grafftey: On a question of privilege may I say this. In good faith I rose in my place and put a question. I politely asked the hon. member a question, as I was following his remarks very carefully. I asked him most politely if he would identify the document from which he was reading. He then went on and abused my district in general and me in particular. I am not asking him to withdraw this abusive language; I am considering the source from which it came. I draw that matter to the attention of the committee, but let it be quite clear. I was not facetious. In a serious manner I asked the hon. member to identify the document from which he was reading. In reply he was abusive, as I say, to me in particular and


to my riding in general. That is on the record, and I let it stand as I take my place.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: He has let his Grit spirit come through.


Gordon Campbell Chown: I do not wish us to get into a controversial debate on this matter. If I know the hon. member for Nipissing I am sure he will soften the reference he made to the hon. member who raised the question of privilege. I also know that a number of interjections occurred before the hon. gentleman had an opportunity to answer the question that has been raised as to identification of the document to which he was referring. I think we will give the hon. member for Nipissing the floor and let him take what course he deems fit.


John Richard Garland: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thought I had properly identified the quotations I had used in trying to make my point. On that point, may I say that I offer no apologies for coming to the house prepared to speak on a subject in which I have a very genuine interest. I do not think it is necessary to make any further explanation. I noted carefully that yesterday the minister read every word he uttered. We made no objection to that procedure. At least I prepared my own notes to which I have been referring.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Are you implying that he does not do so?


David James Walker: I was not going to intervene but with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I should like to do so.


John Richard Garland: Have I the floor, Mr. Chairman? Twenty minutes are gone now.


David James Walker: This is a point of order.


Gordon Campbell Chown: Is the minister raising a point of order or a question of privilege?


David James Walker: I am raising a question of privilege. Under the rules every minister has the right, because of the need to quote figures that he has to give and to go into the details that he has to mention, to read any part of a statement. That is exactly what I did and what any other minister must do. If the hon. member will peruse my speeches he will find literally hundreds and thousands of figures. To take the objection that I had to read part of that statement is illogical and cannot be compared to what is being done now. I have no objection to the hon. member for Nipissing reading his speech, but I object to him pointing out that I have been doing so contrary to the rules. The rules specifically state that the minister may do so.


Alexis Pierre Caron: What is the authority?

Mr. Pallet!: The hon. member for Hull, speaking from his seat as is not unusual, asked for authority for the minister's statement. If he will read Beauchesne, page 124, paragraph No. 144, he will find it.


An hon. Member:: Fourth edition.


Gordon Campbell Chown: I recognize the hon. member for Nipissing.


John Richard Garland: I should like to deal with a matter that is occupying the attention of many of the leaders of the housebuilding industry, namely finding some satisfactory means of facilitating the financing of the older type homes. Surely it cannot be argued that everyone buying a home wants a new house in a new subdivision far removed from his place of work or daily activity. It is becoming daily more and more apparent that this ever spreading development into new raw land is creating tremendous costs in respect of services required and in respect of transportation, etc. However, this has been the trend since the war, and understandably so. The N.H.A. was designed primarily to assist in the construction of new homes, to take care of the tremendous backlog that existed as the result of little or no construction during the war years and indeed during a great part of the thirties.
Today the situation is entirely different. For the first time in 15 years we have seen evidence during the past year that the effective demand has been met. I am not for a moment suggesting that the facilities of the National Housing Act should be diverted from the encouragement of new construction. However, I am fully convinced that the facilities of N.H.A. should be expanded to the extent that the C.M.H.C. could assist in the financing of older type homes along the same lines as is now being done with regard to new construction.
In nearly every Canadian town and city we find older people who have raised their families and who are now living alone in homes much too large for their physical and financial capabilities. Yet these people are forced to live on in these larger homes because no convenient way has been developed to finance the sale of such houses with a small down payment, as is the case with new homes. Therefore the older folks stay on and the younger prospective purchasers are compelled to forgo the opportunity of buying larger homes which might be more in keeping with their family requirements, or resort to some loan shark who will extract the last pound of flesh through a second mortgage. In countless cases families could purchase and properly assume financial responsibility for a moderately priced home but, goodness knows, there are plenty of statistics to prove that
Supply-Public Works
many find the burden of the newer and more expensive homes too great for their incomes. I think the housing statistics put out by the dominion bureau of statistics provide ample proof that 92 per cent of all N.H.A. buyers are earning more than $4,000 a year, so we have reached the point where the National Housing Act in this respect is practically useless to those in the lower income group.
1	believe that making loans available on existing houses would result in a substantial increase in the number of Canadian families owning their homes and this, as I am sure hon. members will agree, would be a highly desirable situation.
As I mentioned earlier, not all families want to live in a particular area that is being developed at the time they are buying a home. It is therefore understandable that under the system I propose, prospective purchasers could buy homes in the locality they prefer.
I think it is apparent to all that if the sales of older homes were encouraged, it would result in an increased demand for new homes. This conclusion is based on the assumption- a proper one, I believe-that the number of potential buyers for older homes would be greatly increased and as a result present owners could sell more easily, cash in their equity and have it available for the purchase of a new home. I therefore urge the government to amend the National Housing Act so as to enable C.M.H.C. to make loans in respect of existing homes along the same lines as loans are presently being made available in respect of new housing. Let us put an end to this discrimination against the owner of an existing house.
Now I should like to turn from something new to an old complaint involving the government's stubborn insistence in clinging to a
2	per cent insurance premium to insure its own mortgages. This is as unrealistic as it is unnecessary, and the record proves it. I will not go as far as some and say that the premium should be eliminated, but most certainly the rate should be reduced. The government's insistence on maintaining the present premium rate adds several hundred dollars to the cost of every home purchased in Canada, not only to the original purchase price but in the financing.
The fund resulting from this premium now stands, I believe, at some $70 million. I believe this fund should be used to assist in making low cost housing available to some of our elderly citizens. The need in this field is great, and with the increase in life expectancy now being experienced the problem will increase. However, I hope to have more to say on this subject at another stage in the examination of these estimates.

Supply-Public Works
I should like to make a further new proposal to the government, namely that home owners who are unemployed for six months or more and who are threatened with foreclosure and the loss of their homes and equities be given special consideration. I propose that a moratorium of 12 months on payments be guaranteed by the government under N.H.A. to home owners who are out of work for a period of more than six months. The slackening of our economic development and the unprecedented level of unemployment demand that attention be given to this problem. The relief I propose should be extended until national prosperity has been restored. This problem is particularly acute in areas where there is long term unemployment. However, losing one's home is a tragedy in any area of this rich young country.


Mr. Pallell:: Would the hon. member care to indicate the particular areas he has in mind?


John Richard Garland: It would be Canada-wide.


John Cameron Pallett: The hon. member said that in certain areas this would apply particularly. Does he have any particular areas in mind.


John Richard Garland: I think the hon. gentleman has misunderstood me.


John Cameron Pallett: Well, he certainly cannot say that for the area which I represent, and I do not want him to include a lot of others.


John Richard Garland: The hon. member may read what I have said in Hansard. The assistance I have proposed could be given at no cost to the federal treasury, because the borrower at the end of the mortgage term could repay the money which had been advanced on his behalf. Unless something is done in this regard it is my intention at the next session of parliament-and I am assuming there will be another session of this parliament-to introduce a bill incorporating the kind of assistance I have just mentioned. Surely there is something missing in legislation which permits a wage earner who becomes unemployed through no fault of his own to lose his home and, in many cases, a major portion of his savings.
I should like now to say a few words in respect to slum clearance and related matters, and in particular to the financing of renewal projects. I was interested to note that the minister, speaking in Halifax on June 1 to the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities, urged that they speed up the job of weeding out blighted areas within their borders. If I may, I should like to quote the minister, as follows:

Let me say straight away that in my opinion we are not making nearly enough progress in getting rid of slums.
Well, I can tell the minister that we on this side of the house heartily agree with this statement, and have been saying so for some time. In his speech at Halifax the minister went on to reprimand the municipalities for not moving fast enough. As most people know, however, our municipalities would like to move more quickly with regard to these matters, but they are handicapped in their financing by the way the federal government gobbles up the investment dollar at high interest rates. I should like to refer to a publication put out by the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities dated May, 1961, and to quote very briefly these words:
The obstacles to municipal borrowing and to the financing of more comprehensive programs of renewal can only be removed by appropriate federal legislation.
The minister might more properly have directed his reprimand to his colleagues who have pursued monetary and fiscal policies leading to higher and higher interest rates. But I do not wish to deal with the shortcomings of the present administration.
The Canadian housing requirements of the future must meet the needs and satisfy the population as a whole rather than any particular segment. At the same time, government must recognize that the earnings of all are not equal. It must also be realized that within each income group there are wide differences or responsibility, due to family numbers, basic managerial ability, incidence of illness and many other relative factors. Any pattern for the future should attempt to provide housing at a price that will afford the greatest opportunity to the greatest number in purchasing their own homes. Such plans must also recognize that there is a large segment of our population which must rent accommodation. Future plans must further recognize the fact that there will also be an increased demand for public housing. This is an economic fact.
In conclusion may I say that we regret the miscalculation and fumbling of the government during most of 1960. We stand ready to commend them, as we have already done, for the worth-while legislation they introduced toward the end of the year. We have for many years urged the establishment of an effective secondary mortgage market which would have the effect of garanteeing a steadier flow of mortgage funds. We think the National Housing Act under both administrations has done an effective job, but believe it should be extended to provide for the financing of older type homes. What was satisfactory in

1954 no longer meets the requirements of 1961. We believe the insurance premium should be reduced. We believe that a moratorium of up to 12 months if necessary be extended to a home owner under N.H.A. who is out of work for six months or more. We believe in a concentrated drive on slum clearance and assistance to municipalities by the establishment of a municipal loan fund, both of which would allow our municipalities to get on with projects badly needed, and which would provide much needed employment in these distressed times.
As I have said on earlier occasions, housing is a most interesting and complex subject and one that will be occupying more and more of our attention and resources as time goes on. Much has been done in the past, but much more remains to be done in the future. When one considers all the social and economic ramifications of this subject in the light of the rapid development in housing which is bound to take place in the foreseeable future, future governments would do well to consider the desirability of a separate department with cabinet status. In this way the housing needs of our people and the economic influences resulting from adequate programming would be assured of a strong voice in government policy, and not just be something tagged on to the end of another department.


David James Walker: Mr. Chairman, I intend to take but a moment, but I know the hon. member for Nipissing would want me to say a word in respect to the National Housing Act interest rate. I should like to tell him again, sir, that this interest rate is based on the yield on long term government bonds and under the N.H.A., as framed by the Liberal government, the yield cannot be more than 2\ per cent above long term government bonds. The present long term yield on government bonds is approximately 5.2 per cent. Therefore the maximum N.H.A. rate, under the rule promulgated by the late Liberal government could be 7J per cent.
However, under our government the present rate is 6f per cent, which is considered to be the lowest competitive rate possible, as compared with other bonds and industrial yields. The decision to adjust the rate twice yearly, which I announced on April 17 last, should keep the N.H.A. rate in relation to other yields. There is no one in Canada who would be more delighted to make it possible to reduce interest rates on N.H.A. loans than myself, as the minister. Having gone through the experience, however, of the approved lenders' funds completely drying up just a few months before I became the minister, when the rate was at 6 per cent, I know what a hazardous expedient it is to reduce
Supply-Public Works
interest rates, as a result of which we can get no money from approved lenders. I am sure my hon. friend, with his knowledge of these matters, and as critic of the opposition in respect to this subject, would not wish the government to exclude private lenders from the market. Otherwise it would cost the federal government hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars per year extra.
In connection with the other suggestion of my hon. friend, that he intends to introduce a bill to declare a moratorium for the benefit of certain people under certain circumstances, might I ask whether he proposes having that measure introduced in each of the provinces or only in the federal parliament? Because it is purely a provincial matter. This is a matter involving property and civil rights, in respect to which the federal government has no authority. Is it his proposition to have someone introduce this measure in the provincial house, or does my hon. friend propose to run for a seat in the legislature of the province of Ontario?
In any event may I say that there are millions of dollars which the approved lenders have invested in N.H.A. mortgages. Is my hon. friend suggesting that the guarantee which has been given to the investor should be done away with, and that a moratorium should be declared so that the mortgage loans which those investors have made in good faith under the terms of the N.H.A., inaugurated originally by the Liberal government and taken advantage of, of course, by the Conservative government, will be seriously affected. Is my hon. friend seriously suggesting there now should be a moratorium in respect of this act?


John Richard Garland: Mr. Chairman, since the minister has asked me a question I should like to attempt to answer it. First I should like to say that it is surprising how he reconciles his words this afternoon with the criticisms directed toward some of us in this house when the present government was on this side.
In respect to the legislation I proposed, surely it is within the capabilities of a society such as ours to introduce legislation which would have the very humane effect of preventing the wage earner of a family from losing his entire savings as a result of being out of work through no fault of his own.


Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Chairman, there are a number of matters of concern to me which are very much related to housing and certain aspects of the housing industry which come under Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the estimates for which are contained in vote No. 373. It is not my intention now, during consideration of the first vote of

Supply-Public Works
the Department of Public Works estimates to raise matters which I think should be raised in respect to vote No. 373. However, there is one matter of principle in respect of which I would very much appreciate the comment of the Minister of Public Works.
I should like to ask the minister whether, in his position as minister and under his oath of office, he could give information to this house relating to the letting of contracts under his jurisdiction. I believe I am correct in saying that on tenders being called, they shall be opened on a national basis, that no tender is opened until after a certain deadline, and that those who have tendered have a right to be present at that time.
If I am accurate in suggesting that the tenders must be opened on a national basis, I suggest it would be rather difficult for many individuals who have tendered to be present when they are opened. I should like the minister to inform this committee whether some tenders are opened on a provincial basis and, if so, whether the minister approves. There is a general understanding among subcontractors across Canada that this government, with all its sanctimonious utterances, has a selected list of subcontractors in various fields. Is the minister prepared to stand up before this committee of the whole and state that there is no such selected list at his divisional headquarters?
As my second question I should like to ask on what basis contracts are let by his department at a provincial or divisional level. I know something of the construction industry and I travel in this country a good deal, as a result of which I have come to certain conclusions regarding the letting of contracts. I do not think it will be too much of a shock to the minister when I suggest that the subcontractors of this country are convinced that there is some dirty work going on in the Department of Public Works in respect to the letting of subcontracts.
According to my information subcontracts are handled in a different way from contracts on a national basis in so far as opening the bids is concerned. National bids are not opened until the deadline is reached and those who tender are present. I am informed that in more than one province the situation with respect to subcontracts is most peculiar. Certain people who tender never put in their tender until a few minutes before the deadline. Some of them know what the other tenders were and their tender, put in in the last few minutes, is always just a few dollars lower than the other tenders. I have heard this said in more than one province of Canada. Subcontractors want to know just what is going on.

If my information is correct, and I think it is, I say to the minister that no contract on the national level should be opened until the deadline is reached, and anyone who tenders can be there. What is the policy on contracts let outside of national headquarters of the Department of Public Works? Is it not possible to have a policy in the provinces or at divisional headquarters which would not only remove the suspicion in the public mind and in the contractors' minds that there is the selected list which I mentioned previously, but also remove the definite suspicion and understanding that before the deadline is reached certain contractors know the amount of the tenders of the other subcontractors, and in the last half hour or last few minutes put in their tenders just below the lowest of those that have already tendered?
Through you, Mr. Chairman, I say to the minister there were grave misgivings in many quarters with respect to this matter. I would like the minister to explain the situation in his department with respect to subcontracts and tenders. If the situation is as I am told it is, then there is a lot of dirty work going on and people are getting contracts at the last minute by underbidding because somehow they get previous information. If this situation exists, then this loophole should be plugged so the system of tendering would be put on a honest basis and contracts would be granted honestly.


David James Walker: Mr. Chairman, the situation in connection with tendering in the Department of Public Works is well known and recognized across Canada. Let me start in Ottawa, or on the general level. If there is a contract with an estimated amount of $15,000 or more a universal tender is called. That goes out together with the specifications, and anybody across Canada in entitled to tender. If the project is to be undertaken in a certain area the people in that area naturally would like to see the tender go to a local contractor in that particular area. This is what we would like to do and we get criticism, of course, if it is not done. But we have found that we can save the people of Canada a great deal of money by having the tender open for everybody to bid on.
For the information of my hon. friend who has just made a statement without any supporting facts, and who is simply asking questions, which he is entitled to do, may I say that when the tender is called the date is set out and the hour up to which a tender or bid can be made. At that hour the tenders are closed. After that hour bids which come in, even a couple of minutes after the hour, are too late. The tenders or bids are then

opened by a department official, or two department officials, sometimes three, and in the presence of a representative of the Canadian Construction Association.
I wish to pay my tribute to the Canadian Construction Association for the tremendous assistance they have been to me during my two-year period as Minister of Public Works, for the suggestions they have made and for the advice I have able to get from them from time to time when I have asked for it on certain tenders. We have found it a wonderful thing. We also have present the people who have bid on the project. Until the bids are opened they are under seal. They are all opened together and there can be no complaint, lest anybody should suspect that favouritism is shown, because they see them all opened. Each of the bidders can be there with the representative of the Canadian Construction Association.
My hon. friend referred to subcontracts. May I tell him that when a bid is made in response to a universal tender the applicant has to set out the subcontractors specifically, and he is not entitled to change those. He has to go ahead with them and use them if he is awarded the contract. In the old days it used to be possible to set out certain subcontractors when the tender was put in and then change them later on. That has all been done away with. We feel we have a fool-proof and, let me say, an honest system.
In connection with local tender calls for small undertakings, there are day labour jobs, as the hon. member for Vancouver East knows. We do not undertake these projects if it is at all possible to avoid them because sometimes they are quite costly. On smaller undertakings in a local area we call for local bids, where anybody can and is invited to bid. The undertaking is advertised in the local newspaper and in the local post office, and the lowest of the bids is accepted. On very small undertakings, such as supplying material or doing a small job, we have what are called invited tenders, where the official engineer in charge of the local office in the area can decide who in that area could supply, shall we say, a stove or some other material.


Harold Edward Winch: Does he have a list in front of him?


David James Walker: No list from our department, no. Under no circumstances has he a list.


Harold Edward Winch: Will you stand there and say there is no selected list?


David James Walker: Do you need to repeat that more than once?


Harold Edward Winch: Yes, I do.
90205-6-403
Supply-Public Works


David James Walker: I have stated that there is no list. Is my hon. friend suggesting that the Department of Public Works would send out lists to our local engineers all over Canada containing names of those whom they should ask to bid on these local projects? The low bidder among the invited tenderers in the local area gets the contract, whatever it happens to be. We have found this practice eminently successful.
I know that I am bitterly criticized time and time again, week in and week out, for being so strict. If there is anything of which I am perhaps guilty it is the fact that I have been as strict as I have in my two years as minister. I know that many of the backbenchers on my side of the house feel that I am unnecessarily strict.


Mr. Robichaud:: They seem to enjoy it.


David James Walker: However, those are the rules in the Department of Public Works. We have tried to work out rules and if at times I appear to be too strict it is because I am endeavouring to follow the rules.
As far as any complaints are concerned, it will be recalled that last year the hon. member for Villeneuve referred to a situation involving day labour work, and as the hon. member for Vancouver East knows this is sometimes difficult to deal with. Away off in the hinterlands you will have a foreman running a job and hiring help. The hon. member will realize how difficult it is to supervise these matters even though they involve small projects. The result is that trouble can arise. In that instance we not only investigated but we prosecuted and put certain people in jail. Some of them are still in jail.
I should like to make a suggestion to the hon. member who has been a member of the house for many years and who, when he led the C.C.F. party in the province of British Columbia, was within one seat of being the premier of that province. I know he will not put a bogus case before me because there is nothing bogus about the hon. member. I would ask him to give me any information he has about any situation which he himself has investigated, not just the wild statements of people who have missed out because they did not make the low bid or because, as I pointed to the hon. member for Hull last year, they were incompetent to carry out the contract, or because they were financially incapable of doing so. If the hon. member has any instance where the government has not followed the rules on which I have elaborated at some length because of the respect I have for the hon. member, I would ask him to let the department know and we will investigate the matter and, if necessary, we will prosecute.

Supply-Public Works
If there is any misconduct on the part of our officials, we will fire them, and every official of the department across Canada knows that. General Young, my deputy, summons the engineers to Ottawa every year and we go into these matters carefully and fully, Every official knows where we stand on this subject. If the hon. member does not mind me saying so, he will appreciate that unless we have specific examples to verify, support or bolster statements made it is very hard for us to do anything except to outline the general situation. I invite the hon. member and all other hon. members at any time and under any circumstances to bring to my attention any variation from these rules. The department is, of course, a vast one. We are spending more than twice as much as the Liberals did in an effort to solve unemployment and develop the country.


Paul Joseph James Martin: With less consequence.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: He is reading aloud.


David James Walker: I wish the hon. member for Essex East would note that I have not had any notes for this particular discourse. I say to hon. members that they should bring these things to our attention. It will be appreciated that there may be some derelictions as we found in a certain township away off in the hinterlands last year in connection with a day labour contract. Bring these matters to our attention and we will investigate them. In the Department of Public Works we feel that by following this system we are saving the taxpayers of Canada millions of dollars every year.


Gordon Campbell Chown: The hon. member for Comox-Alberni.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Chairman, I should like to pose a question to the minister on this subject. I am glad that the minister brought up this question because in my riding there is a case that has been dragging along for many years. It involves a contractor who padded payroll lists before 1957 with the names of school children and other persons who never worked and for whom money was drawn. I am very anxious to have some information with regard to this case.


Mr. Cardiff:: That was under the former government.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Yes. It was the Liberal organizer for St. Charles-Richelieu. I should like the minister to give his immediate attention to this case so that justice will be done as soon as possible.
The Depuiy Chairman: Order. I think it would be fairer to the members of the committee if they would follow the rotation
(Mr. Walker.]

which is listed before me here in the order that they have presented their names to me. I know all hon. members will have chances to ask specific questions when particular items are being dealt with but at the present time I think we should limit ourselves to the usual debate that takes place and which is the practice of the committee under item 1 of the estimates of a department.


Mr. McQuillan:: Mr. Chairman, since over half of British Columbia's 15,000 miles of coast line lies within the constituency of Comox-Alberni, I feel called upon to make a few remarks on this item. In the constituency of Comox-Alberni in particular there is a multitude of scattered communities without, in many cases, interconnection by roads. This results in the Department of Public Works being called upon to spend huge sums of money for wharves, floats, boat harbours and other such maritime services.
The residents of the communities to which I have referred are undoubtedly more interested in the work of this department than in that of any other department of the government. Because of rapid development, particularly in the northern part of Vancouver island and along the west coast of that island, and because of the ever-changing pattern of transportation, demands for expenditures are heavy and will be increasingly so. Where wharves and floats were not required a few years ago, in some cases there is now an urgent necessity, and the need for safe mooring facilities for the large fishing fleets we have on the coast and the small coastwise merchant ships such as tugs and small freighters is a need that must be met as soon as possible in many areas.
I have already brought to the attention of the minister and his officials the need for public docks in several places. One is Tahsis and another one is Gold river on the west coast of Vancouver island. I have pointed out the need for safe harbour facilities between the Ballenas islands and Campbell river. This is the course that ships follow as they go up the coast of British Columbia. It is an area in which it is extremely difficult to find a safe anchorage during a severe storm. In the past there have been a number of lives lost in that area, some within the past year, and I feel that both lives and shipping could be saved if a safe anchorage were provided at an appropriate spot. I know the department is giving consideration to the essential requirements of Kelsey bay. This is the present terminus of the island highway and because of the number of boats that require moorage in that area I urge the minister to proceed with this project at the earliest possible date.

The residents of Parksville-Qualicum beach area, as well as those on Lasqueti island, are grateful for the item included in these estimates for the reconstruction of the French Creek boat harbour. This project should be expedited as the present facilities are daily becoming less usable by the commercial fishing fleet and other boats.
The requirements I have mentioned lately are but a few of the essential ones along that part of the coast. The people of the area are quite aware of, and greatly appreciate, the large sums of money that have been spent on public works in the last three years. I know that the total amounts to several millions of dollars, and I also know that a trip along the coast line of the Comox-Alberni constituency-which I hope the minister will have an opportunity to make this summer- will convince the minister that millions more are needed to fill the essential needs.
As I said before, development in some areas is at a rapid pace. New pulpmills are contemplated in the near future, and there has been a tremendous development in mining in this area which, until recently, was not considered by some government departments to have much promise. All of these developments require extended wharf facilities and other public works. New mines are coming into production, resulting in new communities, and development programs involving many millions are under way. I am sure the department will do its best to provide the works, such as wharves, boat harbours and floats, that come under their jurisdiction.
I should like to speak for a moment on a subject which I have raised before, namely, the question of the trans-Canada highway on Vancouver island. I know the minister gave a short, and perhaps one might say a rather sharp, answer to the Hon. Mr. Gaglardi, minister of highways for British Columbia, to his telegraphed request for extension of the trans-Canada highway to the north end of the island. The manner in which the request was made no doubt gave rise to the answer which was sent. However, I do believe the people of Vancouver island are entitled to have the minister give serious consideration to this proposal. The mistake of designating only 70 miles of the highway on an island over 300 miles long as part of the trans-Canada route, is one for which the government of British Columbia must accept the greater part of the blame.
The minister has said on several occasions that his first interest is in the completion of the first trans-Canada highway. I am not talking about a part of a second trans-Canada highway, I am talking about an extension of the present one to its rightful terminal, the most westerly accessible point 90205-6

403J
Supply-Public Works
on the Pacific coast. While I am referring to the extension of this highway, I might say that the British Columbia government recently received, or expects to receive, from this government, a subsidy for the construction of its two proposed ferries operating between the mainland and Victoria. I believe this will probably amount to something over $2 million. I think it would be only fair for the provincial government to use this $2 million for the development of a highway in the northern part of Vancouver island.
I spoke earlier, Mr. Chairman, about changing patterns of transportation along the Pacific coast. Many communities formerly served by coastal vessels sailing from Vancouver are now served by ferries from Vancouver island points. In the past the federal government assumed full responsibility for the construction of the necessary steamer docking facilities at these communities. In some cases these so-called steamer docking facilities are no longer required because the communities are served by ferries from Vancouver island. I feel it is only fair that the federal government should accept responsibility for these necessary ferry landings. As I said before, the traditional type of wharf is no longer required. The government had no hesitation in the past in accepting responsibility for the old type steamer wharf, so I think they should give some consideration to accepting some responsibility for these necessary ferry landings.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I should like to express my appreciation, and I think I speak for my constituents, of the consideration that the minister and his officials have given to the multitude of requests that come from a constituency such as mine. I should like to say that I warn the minister, in case he is about to mention Ripple rock and all the money that was spent there a number of years ago, if he brings up that subject, I am going to agitate amongst the diehards in Victoria that we start a campaign to have the hole filled up again and this will cost a lot more money than the cost of blowing up the rock.


Mr. Badanai:: I have a few matters concerning my constituency which require the attention of the department, the estimates of which are now before us. Some time ago I received a letter containing a resolution passed by the corporation of the city of Fort William which reads as follows, and I quote:
That whereas it has been very evident that municipalities have very great difficulty due to the increased use of automobiles and heavy trucking through and over city streets in trying to maintain and keep up with the increasing demand for roads and also the increased standards required for present day heavy vehicular traffic. The cost therefore, has risen beyond the ability of the

Supply-Public Works
municipalities to adequately cope with it. This problem has been recognized in part by the federal government in the United States and they are increasing their assistance to the municipalities for road construction.
Therefore be it resolved that we request the federal government to make realistic appraisal of the plight of the municipalities in respect to road construction with the view of setting up the policy to participate with the municipality and the province in sharing the costs of all road construction within the municipalities.
I realize, Mr. Chairman, that it has not been federal policy to assist financially in road construction within municipalities. However, it seems to me that the time may be opportune to give such a policy some serious consideration. It could be set out in a formula similar to the winter works incentive program which would create job opportunities for many unemployed. I urge the minister to keep such a proposal in mind which, if adopted, would receive the commendation of every municipality in Canada.
Last year, again at the request of the Fort William city council, I brought to the attention of the minister the need for breakwater protection for the McKellar and Mission islands facing lake Superior within the city of Fort William. These two islands which form part of the harbour frontage of the city are exposed to the lake and require the protection of a breakwater, from the present breakwater which protects a portion of the mainland fronting on Port Arthur. At the present time the Canadian Pacific Railway own a large area of land on McKellar island which would be ideal for industrial use if it had breakwater protection, and the same statement applies to a large tract of property located on the Mission island.
Another major obstacle which is retarding the full use of these two islands and which must be removed is that at the present time there is only one bridge connecting the mainland with the Mission island and a second bridge connecting the Mission island with the McKellar island. In the event that anything happens to the bridge connecting the mainland, it will have the effect of separating both islands completely from the mainland. It will therefore be seen that another bridge between the mainland and the Mission island is absolutely essential.
The building of another bridge would remove the main objection against the almost immediate development of these islands for potential industrial expansion, which includes the probability of a steel mill since Premium Ore Company which is headed by Cyrus Eaton, the chairman of the board of Steep Rock Iron Mines, has an option on the Mission island for such a project.
In an article written for the industrial edition of the Fort William Daily Times

Journal, Senater N. M. Paterson, a man of great experience and vision made the following statement:
The seaway will gradually develop as it takes time to change methods and deepen channels which will be required over the next few years, but I would like to take this opportunity to point out the necessity of building a new bridge from the island across the Mission river to the mainland so that if anything happened to the railway bridge in Westfort there would be an alternative route rather than Slate river.
It would be a most serious thing to all the traffic which crosses that bridge daily if the wind happened to catch a ship going through the bridge and twisted the bridge from its foundation. We must attract the authorities' attention to this important matter as with foreign ships going in, anything is liable to happen.
Those living at the head of the lakes do not see the development as one who goes there periodically and to me the progress is as amazing as we see in eastern cities in proportion.
I do not think I need to add more to the senator's statement which emphasizes the very real danger that some day something might happen to the present lone bridge, except to say that the new bridge would also serve as a highway to further development of harbour facilities, and it is generally conceded that when expansion in the seaway dock now under construction becomes necessary, the only desirable area available will be on these two islands.
My constituents are very grateful to the government for the lakehead seaway terminal now under construction, which will be a great asset not only to the lakehead area but to the prairie provinces, as intimated by their respective premiers on numerous occasions, because it will improve the transshipping of goods and materials east and west and vice versa.
Another matter of considerable importance to the area with which the Minister of Public Works and the Minister of Labour are particularly familiar is the need1 for a new public building to replace the old dilapidated 70-year old structure which houses the national employment office. The building in question was the post office vacated some 30 years ago. It is a fire trap and it is totally inadequate for the services for which it is put into use.
The department has an ideal site with a frontage of 273 feet by 140 feet centrally located with ample parking facilities. It is no secret that the Minister of Labour has recommended that the construction of a new building be given earliest consideration. The anticipation was that in the estimates of 1960-61 provision would be made for this project. I regret very much to find that the decision to build has again been postponed.
During the Easter recess I paid a visit to the national employment office and, as I

expected, I found the place crowded with people in every nook and corner. Office workers and job seekers could hardly be distinguished. The corridors were cluttered and when I asked one of the officials if they had toilet facilities for visitors, the answer I received was that washroom facilities available were limited for the staff on the third floor of the building-which by the way has no elevator; you have to walk up-and inadequate even for the office workers.
One of the officials from the Winnipeg office, namely Mr. L. T. Fraser, after an inspection, recently made a report to the effect that inasmuch as it will take two or more years before the new building is erected, he would recommend that between 1,000 to 1,200 square feet of suitable office space be leased as close as possible to the present premises which he considers insufficient for the claims pay function, but which would provide accommodation for the male placement division.
This is clearly a situation which should not be allowed to worsen before taking action and, if the government is trying to alleviate unemployment by such means, among others, and if a stimulation is needed in public works, what is the government waiting for? I doubt whether there is a national employment office the facilities of which are as poor and inadequate as those at the Fort William office which serves an area of 70,000 people. There are other departments of the federal government which are paying rent in the city of Fort William and I cannot see why there should be any delay in providing a building which would house other services as well.
The annual report of proceedings under the Trans-Canada Highway Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1960, contains a statement that the trans-Canada highway project provided 1,531,155 man days-eight hours-of employment during the one year; and labour created by the supply of materials and services estimated at an additional 2,602,964 man days of eight hours.
From this statement it can be seen that road work absorbs a substantial number of our labour force and what is even more important, it provides jobs for the most part to the unskilled labour.
In the absence of any other similar projects which would employ a large number of people, I submit that the government should give serious consideration to the construction of a four-lane national highway.
Plans for a six-lane expressway to serve Malton airport from Toronto are completed. It will replace the old two-lane highway which has been a bottleneck responsible for
Supply-Public Works
many delays and accidents. I only wish I could now offer congratulations to those responsible for the planned improvement, on similar action in connection with the highway west of the lakehead.
During the debate on the trans-Canada highway resolution last year, I drew attention to the poor condition of the highway west from Fort William to the Manitoba boundary. Complaints had been pouring in from various organizations and travellers. Now, a year later, with the exception of a few stretches, the highway resembles a trail of potholes. I realize that the upkeep of the trans-Canada highway is not the responsibility of the minister. Should it not then be the responsibility of the federal government to ascertain that before any contribution is made there should be some assurance that a fair standard for the highway is established for every part of the country. Speaking of road conditions in the province of Ontario, what we need is a national co-ordinated system which would serve the national interest in case of an emergency. Existing traffic arteries leading out of our major cities, including our capital city, do not have the capacity to evacuate the population, should that become necessary.
It is because of these considerations among others, not the least of which are the safety and convenience of the people, that a conference should in my view be convened by the government to consider these matters together with the provinces and major municipalities, traffic engineers and the good roads association.
The Canadian tax foundation in its study of taxes and traffic has this to say on the subject, and I quote:
Undoubtedly, highways have some "national" implications in Canada, just as they have provincial and municipal implications, and these are probably broader than the federal government has been willing to recognize in the past. The Trans-Canada Highway Act and some of the earlier legislation has been in the right direction and more of this type of program should be planned for the future.
The "national" implications of highways in Canada are far more intangible than in most other countries-particularly in the United States-and the danger is that they will be valued too low rather than the reverse. We shall not truly be a national community until it is possible for the masses of our citizens who own cars to travel the country from coast to coast in comfort and safety during at least the milder times of the year.
Just where the line falls between national effort that will achieve this end and federal assistance to the provinces and municipalities in meeting their normal responsibilities for highways, roads and streets cannot be said categorically, but undoubtedly experience and experiment would produce some workable rules. Whenever the line is drawn it should be consistent with the concept of highway financing set out previously.

Supply-Public Works
This statement bears out conclusively the need for a greater and an intensified effort towards the establishment of a national system of highways.
In the interest of safety on our highways I draw attention to the study which was made in the state of Kansas last year which revealed that highway accidents dropped by 25 per cent when white lines or guide lines were painted along the edge of all roads outside urban centres. I should, therefore, like to impress the minister and his officials with the immediate necessity of pressing those responsible to have the edges of highways painted white. I am confident that is a commendable measure which might be the means of saving many lives and preventing many unnecessary accidents.
Now I come to another matter which may appear to be only of minor importance, but I want to assure the minister that in the eyes of hundreds of people who are concerned the subject which I am about to discuss is of considerable interest. It has to do with the accommodation of the income tax office in the city of Fort William which serves the entire area of Thunder Bay including the city of Port Arthur. Several weeks ago I pointed out in a letter to the Minister of National Revenue, the need for the renovation of this building. I am hoping that the Minister of Public Works will have someone in his department look into the conditions which exist in this public building. A month ago I had an opportunity to inspect these premises which were constructed in 1912 and which now serve five times the number of people they were designed to accommodate. The building is shared with the customs office which occupies the lower floor. The receiving area of the income tax office is totally inadequate, space being wasted in one place and cramped in another. I am not asking for a new building. I am being modest. .A good renovation job and the replacement of creaking chairs by more comfortable furniture together with an improvement in seating capacity would be a satisfactory approach.
I could bring other matters to the attention of the minister, however, I wish to be modest in my requests and want only to emphasize the importance of certain things which are essential, namely: early consideration for breakwater protection for the Mc-Kellar and Mission islands in lake Superior; assistance in the building of a new bridge over the Mission river in order to prevent isolation of those two islands where millions of dollars are invested in industry, including an oil refinery, a hydro steam generating station, and several oil storage plants, in the event of a possible break in the present
[Mr. Badanai.j

bridge; the construction of a federal building to house the national employment service and other federal services; restoration of the old customs building and consideration in respect to an improved trans-Canada highway.
I submit these suggestion with the knowledge that implementation of these requests will not only benefit my constituency alone, but will directly and indirectly have a beneficial effect shared by all Canadians.
One further matter to which I wish to refer, and which has caused considerable irritation, is the manner in which announcements are made in respect to government projects affecting members' constituents. As an example of what I refer to, the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation a few weeks ago released a number of welcome announcements having to do with items such as the federal loan for the sewage project at Langenburg, Saskatchewan. These announcements were all made by the hon. member for Melville, the member concerned, on behalf of the minister.
Other announcements concerning similar projects at Tugaske and Dinsmore, Saskatchewan were made by the hon. member for Mackenzie as well as the announcement in respect to the project regarding an old people's home, made by the hon. member for St. Boniface.
An announcement was also made by the Secretary of State for External Affairs in respect of his own constituency in Vancouver which demonstrates that, notwithstanding the fact that his duties are of an exalted nature, he feels that an elected representative should properly regard any announcement of this nature as being his prerogative.
That pattern is not always followed. For instance, there was announcement made regarding a sewage plant for Willow Bunch, which is in the constituency of Assiniboia, but was the hon. member representing that area notified of that project? I do not know, but the announcement was made by the Minister of Public Works. Whether or not previous governments have followed similar methods is unimportant to me. I do honestly feel that the Minister of Public Works should consider a change of policy in this regard. I admit that it is not a matter of great importance but a change would, I am sure, result in a more congenial and co-operative attitude on the part of all concerned.
Mr. Chairman, that represents everything I wish to bring to the attention of the minister at this stage, and I am sure he will give consideration to my suggestions. I have great faith in the competent officials of his department who have years of experience in this

department. I suggest all they need is a little encouragement from the minister and his approval so they can go ahead and do that job for which they are admirably equipped.


Mr. Matthews:: Mr. Chairman, I find myself in rather a peculiar situation because I have made notes which I intended to read. However, because of events which have taken place recently in this committee, I hesitate to do so. I am left with two courses to follow;
I can rip up the notes and write a letter to the minister, or perhaps I can go ahead and speak off the cuff. Unfortunately, for some time I have been living on a basis of tightening up my belt and find myself now with shirts without sleeves, so the cuffs are gone.
I should like to say that it is a great pleasure on my part to take part in this debate on the estimates of the Department of Public Works. This department, under the very capable and industrious minister, has contributed greatly to the improvement of the economy of Canada. I congratulate the minister and the officials of his department for the excellent work that is being done. In spite of the doom and gloom and the pessimistic crepe hanging of certain individuals, the minister has proceeded with courage and faith to build up Canada so that Canadians can enjoy that prosperity which is rightfully theirs. The minister's program of allotting public works funds to all the provinces of Canada and to the localities where they are most needed and will do the most good, has certainly paid off. It is noticeable that he is consistent in this program.
I wish to bring to the attention of the minister the necessity of a breakwater at Chemainus, British Columbia. Chemainus has been a port of export since the first sailing vessel cleared the harbour in 1861. The MacMillan, Bloedel and Powell River Limited mill at Chemainus is the second largest mill in Canada and the sixth largest in the world. Well over 100 deep-sea ships load at this port annually, and in 10 months in 1959, 126 ships loaded and sailed to all parts of the world. Harbour dues paid since January 1954 to December 1959 amounted to $52,991.41, and in 1959 alone amounted to $10,903.14.
The people of that area pay personal income tax on a payroll in excess of $7 million annually and I am sure the government receives a substantial amount from corporation income taxes from the mill in that area. From all sources the federal government has received millions of dollars of revenue from Chemainus over the past years, yet all that has been built there by the federal government is one government wharf, one spar buoy
Supply-Public Works
and one gas flasher light at the harbour entrance. There is not one permanent government structure in Chemainus to show for 99 years of progress and taxes paid. Even the post office and customs office are rental property. The following figures show the investment which has been made in that area up to 1959. MacMillan, Bloedel and Powell River, wharves and structures, $9 million; inventories of logs, lumber and chips in scows, $1,100,000; and scows, $200,000, totalling $10,300,000. There is also a railroad ferry slip in the amount of $50,000; a federal government wharf, $75,000; a provincial government wharf, $90,000; construction by Island Wharves Limited, $30,000; eleven tugs belonging to Chemainus Towing Limited, $125,000; construction by Western Forest Products, $75,000; fishing vessels, $100,000; 138 pleasure boats, $100,000; and a marine taxi, $10,000.
Other investments in Chemainus are a British Columbia power commission thermal plant in the amount of $15 million and other MacMillan and Bloedel buildings making a grand total of well over $40 million.
Moorage for small craft provided in the harbour is as follows: the government wharf, 1,060 feet, Western Forest industries float, 1,500 feet and other floats, 250 feet.
During 1959 over 1,000 small craft used the port of Chemainus to clear customs, to shop for supplies and to take on fuel and ice. This port is open to the north, northwest and west winds which have a sweep of five to 15 miles of open water. Even during July and August the winds have kept small craft from entering the harbour. These two months are the best months of the boating season and the lack of a breakwater has caused a serious loss of business to local merchants as cruisers enter the harbour, note the lack of protection, turn and sail to better anchorage.
The federal government could and should construct a rock-filled breakwater from Hospital point to the spar buoy and Chemainus would then become a safe and secure harbour. The people of Chemainus have tried for years to get this breakwater built and I suggest to the minister that this request be reviewed and work started as soon as possible.
There are certain locations in Canada where a program of public works makes a great difference to the welfare and prosperity of the people living there. One such place is Ganges, on Salt Spring island. There are no large payrolls or industry at Ganges and the establishment of a boat basin would undoubtedly add to the prosperity of that wonderful harbour. I urge the minister to give this matter immediate and careful consideration.
The Department of Public Works has made a survey in connection with a boat basin at

Supply-Public Works Ganges, and I have been advised that the proposal has been placed on the department's advance planning program. Each year hundreds of boats cruise the waters of Salt Spring island; many of them go to Ganges harbour but because of the great popularity of Ganges there is not enough mooring space for them. Ganges harbour lies in the centre of the best cruising waters in the world. Ganges has all the facilities needed to make it the best boating centre on the west coast. They have boat repair yards, a fine hospital, good doctors, stores and shops as required by the boating public.
I ask that the minister give this important matter very serious consideration and that a start be made on a boat basin as soon as possible. It will have to be done sometime and I believe that now is the time to get on with it as the people of Ganges have waited long enough for something that should have been done years ago.


Mr. Tucker:: Mr. Chairman, I shall begin my remarks on the estimates of this very important department by expressing my appreciation to the minister and his staff of their many acts of courtesy extended to me from time to time, both in Ottawa and in Newfoundland, and to assure the minister that they have helped me in no small way in passing on important information to my constituents. However, as can be expected, I did not always agree with the minister or with the decision of his officials; but I must thank them for the prompt replies and assure the minister that as long as I am a member from Newfoundland I shall work in the best interests of that province.
This committee is aware but sometimes forgets that Newfoundland entered this great dominion, which now stretches from the Atlantic to the Pacific, as the tenth province only in 1949, and we shall, therefore, be a long time in catching up with even the Atlantic provinces which themselves are by no means the richest provinces.
Canada is not a number of provinces grouped together but a great dominion comprised of 10 provinces united for the common good of its people, and as a province is weak so is the nation. No chain can be stronger than its weakest link. Weakness in one part impairs the whole nation, and if we have one weak province then we cannot have a healthy and prosperous nation.
Newfoundland is an island of approximately 43,000 square miles with a coast line of 6,000 miles. In Newfoundland we have problems which are unique and which do not exist in any other province and therefore should be treated as such.

I am well aware that the Department of Public Works has spent much money in Newfoundland on public works but no more than is spent proportionately in other provinces. For a number of years Newfoundland was completely dependent on its fisheries. While this position has changed somewhat, nevertheless it is a very important industry and ties in with the logging industry.
The department proposes to improve facilities in many communities along the bleak coast of Newfoundland and for this I am grateful, particularly for the proposed construction of the public wharf at Dildo, Trinity bay, where there is a large whaling and fresh fish operation. It is from here that the only mink feed delivery service operates in Canada. This is essential to the existence of 20,000 mink in the 20 ranches in this area.
In addition, this wharf provides shelter for the fishermen to moor their boats and as a result they will be able to fish later in the fall of the year. Every year because of the spring storms and the ice that floats around our coast many repairs have to be made to the public wharves, slipways, stages and so forth. In addition there is always a great need for the dredging of the harbours and coves. I am pleased to learn that the Department of Public Works intends to do some dredging this year in some seven communities in my riding. I believe this work will prove highly beneficial.
I would also urge the minister to see that as much work as possible be done early in the spring so that the fishermen can get the benefit of those services which have been provided and at the same time get badly needed employment.
I am well aware that everything cannot be done in all communities of Newfoundland in any one year, but there are a few places in particular which I should like to mention at this time, even though they have already been brought to the attention of the minister by way of petitions, letters, personal meetings or by telephone calls. I am now thinking of settlements which I know are very important as far as our fisheries are concerned.
First, I call the minister's attention to the need for improving facilities in the Port-deGrave area, including Hibbs Cove, where a breakwater is badly needed. In 1959 I understand that 9 million pounds of fresh fish were produced in that community and when the water is rough the fishermen have to go three miles to discharge their catch and then truck it back to their stages to salt it. The harbour is so crowded with boats that the fishermen can walk across the cove by

stepping from one boat to another. If a breakwater were constructed it would give the fishermen much more space in which to carry on their work.
In the Port de Grave area we have as good fishermen as will be found in any part of Canada. I understand there is a firm which would erect a fresh fish filleting plant in the Port de Grave area if improvements were made to the harbour facilities.
I also request improvements in Harbour Grace, which is one of the most important fishing communities in Newfoundland. Here we have one of the most modern fresh fish processing plants in North America, owned and operated by one of the most progressive firms in the industry, namely North Eastern Fish Industries Limited. This plant is very beneficial not only to the immediate area but also to many persons in Trinity and Conception bays. Last year there were in operation out of Harbour Grace nine boats 36 feet long and over, five boats 32 feet long and over, 12 fishing boats under 32 feet and a number of other small boats. The condition of the public wharf at Harbour Grace is bad and not suitable for the tying up of small fishing boats. There is no place where the fishermen can haul up their boats or moor them in safety. A petition has been forwarded to the minister by the fishermen at Harbour Grace and because of the great necessity of a wharf I again urge the minister to give this matter further consideration. I would also ask him to consider the construction of a haul-out at Harbour Grace similar to the one which the Department of Transport proposes to construct at Clarenville this year.
I would also be grateful if the minister would consider the need for a fishermen's landing at Carbonear. I am pleased to learn that the department proposes to repair the government wharf there this year.
At Chapel Arm and Butter Cove in Trinity bay there are no public wharves and I must again ask the minister to see if his department will construct wharves there.
Again I must ask the minister to give sympathetic consideration to the petitions submitted by the fishermen of Melrose, Trinity bay. One petition was dated February 16, 1960, and another March 6, 1961, and nothing has been done notwithstanding the fact that the majority of the voters supported the friend of the minister. I am aware that many investigations have been made in this harbour and unfavourable reports were received. The fishermen at Melrose do not agree with the results of the investigations of the officials, and they think that improvements could be made to the harbour at a cost much less than the estimates submitted to the minister.
90205-6-404
Supply-Public Works
The fishermen of Melrose have never had a public wharf of any kind and have to carry on their avocation in the same manner as their ancestors did 100 years ago. There are more than 60 fishermen in this community with 40 boats, and these fishermen are hard workers and very industrious. Their catches of codfish have meant much to the fresh fish plants at Catalina and Port Union. It has been estimated that the total revenue for this community would be $30,000 yearly.
There are many other communities where the Department of Public Works could improve the harbour and fishing facilities. Among these are Coley's Point, Bishop's Cove, Burnt Point, Caplin Cove in Conception bay, Western Bay, Old Perlican, Green's Harbour, Winterton, New Harbour, Monroe, Dunfield and Butter Cove. It is all the more necessary to help the fishermen in every way because of the competition we are getting from foreign countries, the latest addition being Russia. According to reports, Russia now has 150 modern vessels operating in the fisheries off the coast of Newfoundland.
During the national Liberal rally a committee unanimously recommended the construction of a major auditorium in Ottawa for the accommodation of large national gatherings. This resolution was submitted by the Newfoundland delegation and was enthusiastically endorsed by the national problem subcommittee. At the present time it is difficult to hold meetings in the national capital, Ottawa, and the present facilities are such that they discourage large conventions from coming here.
During the Liberal rally many temporary rooms were set up in the agricultural section of the coliseum in which committees could hold meetings. Most of the committees, owing to pressure of work, were meeting at the same time. The rooms were far from soundproof. As a matter of fact, when a speaker with a loud voice was talking in an adjacent room it was sometimes thought we had two speakers in the same room talking at the same time, which reminded us of what takes place sometimes in this house. The rooms were so poorly lighted and so crowded that they reminded us of the black hole of Calcutta. In my opinion it is the duty of the federal government to see that such a building is erected in Ottawa, a city in which every Canadian should take an interest and of which we should all be proud.
I should also like the minister to give consideration to the erection of a public building in Brigus, Conception bay. At Brigus there is a building that is outdated in every respect and is in a bad state of repair. The present building is used by officials of the department of welfare, the forestry division,

Supply-Public Works the post office and for a court house, and is quite often used for public meetings also.
I should like to speak for a few minutes on the trans-Canada highway. The trans-Canada highway, when completed from the western end of Newfoundland to St. John's, the capital, will cover approximately 600 miles, about 200 of which have been paved and about 100 of which are ready for paving. I understand that it will cost about $50 million to construct and pave the remainder of the mileage of the trans-Canada highway. Newfoundland has the second lowest population of all the provinces and the highest road mileage per capita.
The terms of the agreement respecting the proportion of the cost paid by each province should be based on the cost of living in each province and the taxes collected from the people, coupled with the earning power of each province. Newfoundland has a claim to some special consideration with regard to financing because at the present time she is the only province that does not have a standard gauge railway. Newfoundland has a narrow gauge railway and this is a great problem.
Newfoundland and the Atlantic provinces also, I believe, have not as yet enough local roads to provide the means of transportation required to transport provisions from one part of the province to another. This is urgently required for the maintenance of the people and to help the province toward progress and prosperity. It will not be until secondary roads are provided that the Atlantic provinces will even consider the completion of another trunk highway, let alone completion of the trans-Canada highway. At this time, to these provinces of the Atlantic region, especially Newfoundland, the trans-Canada highway seems like something away off in the distance, a beautiful dream. This is the way it will remain unless the federal government come to realize that, if the trans-Canada highway is to be completed within the lifetime of any of us now living, they will have to shoulder their duty and responsibility to all the Canadian people and make the necessary provisions to have this highway completed by providing the required financial assistance. If the federal government intends to continue its present formula, then it is just as well to face the fact that the trans-Canada highway will never be completed. Consequently, the economy of Canada will suffer because of the neglect of those regions which most need and most deserve federal support.
(Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, the provinces take full responsibility with respect to the layout of the trans-Canada highway.


We have learned that in the province of Quebec, the trans-Canada highway will go through the city of Montreal and then cross a bridge to be built over the St. Lawrence in order to connect the north shore to the south shore.
This bridge will be built in Boucherville and will cost approximately $90 million. Therefore, the trans-Canada highway will run along the south shore of the St. Lawrence. I wonder why the Quebec government which is responsible for the layout of the trans-Canada highway, has not decided that the route be laid out so that the highway would run on the north shore, through the constituencies of Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm, Berthier-Maskinonge-Delanaudiere and so forth.
The decision taken by the Quebec government to build this highway on the south shore of the St. Lawrence will hinder the development of the area of Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm and of that part of the province which is located on the north shore of the St. Lawrence.
I should not want the Quebec authorities to discriminate against the district of Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm and the north shore of the St. Lawrence. The city of Joli-ette is but a few miles from Montreal. It is essential that a highway should be built to connect those two cities. Consequently, I would have thought it would be more logical to build the trans-Canada highway on the north shore, thus bringing closer to Montreal the riding of my distinguished colleague from Berthier-Maskinonge-Delanaudiere as well as my own riding.
If the Quebec government had decided to do that, the Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm and Berthier-Maskinonge-Delanaudiere districts would have undergone extraordinary economic development.
In addition, Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask the minister whether the C.M.H.C. and the national research council have carried out or are still carrying out joint studies to provide Canada with a national building code. I should like the minister to tell us whether such a code will soon be provided and put into force. In other words, I should like to know what progress the C.M.H.C. and the national research council have made in that regard.
(Text):


Hédard-J. Robichaud: While it is not my intention at this time to discuss in a general way the

estimates of the Minister of Public Works, I do wish to bring to the attention of the minister certain projects which are of particular concern to my constituents in Gloucester. The minister is aware, I am sure, as are his officials, that numerous requests have been received by his department for the development of the port of Bathurst. Last year a delegation from the town of Bathurst met with the minister and his officials and presented a definite request to improve the accommodation at that particular port. I wish the minister could tell us, before he closes the debate on this item, what progress has been made in this direction. I understand that the request was for the dredging of a 23-foot channel in order to accommodate ocean-going vessels.
No later than yesterday a most important announcement was made by the premier of New Brunswick to the effect that Brunswick Mining and Smelting, which has been idle for a number of years, will soon resume operations and so will Consolidated Mining in the same area. The premier of New Brunswick went further and stated that by 1963 a smelter will be erected in that area in order to take care of the production of these mines. If this project is completed, there will be a definite necessity for the development of harbour accommodation and I hope that the co-operation of the federal government will be forthcoming at that time.
I should like to bring to the ministers attention certain requests which have been before the department for some time relating to some of the important fishing communities in my constituency. In Maisonnette, for example, we have about 40 or 45 fishing boats in operation. Fishing is the only industry in that community. Notwithstanding the fact that these fishermen have available a small landing of about 275 feet in length with a depth of water of a foot and a half at low tide, last year they landed over 1.5 million pounds of fish. I understand that the department has had in hand for the last two years a plan for the extension of the present wharf. I understand that this extension could be carried out at an estimated cost of approximately $165,000.
As a result of our experience with similar projects, we know that if tenders were called for the extension of the Maisonnette wharf in order to provide water of a depth of four feet, which will give good but not perfect shelter, the project could be completed at a cost of about $125,000. This would be definitely in line with similar projects approved by the department in the past. I hope that the fishermen of Maisonnette will be granted this extension to their wharf without delay. This extension would provide urgently needed protection because every year these fishermen 90205-6-404J
Supply-Public Works
lose two or three boats during storms and, in addition to that, their fishing operations have to be curtailed.
There is also before the department a request for the replacement of the Lower Caraquet wharf which was carried away during a storm in 1958. Early in 1959, the Minister of Public Works notified the local chamber of commerce that the replacement of the wharf would be considered in the 196061 estimates. However, the 1960-61 estimates were introduced, and they did not contain any item for the replacement of the Lower Caraquet wharf. We now have the 1961-62 estimates, and again there is no item to cover the replacement of this wharf. I hope the minister will give serious consideration to the replacement of this wharf which is needed for the development of the fishing industry in that area.
Another fishing community in my constituency at which some improvements are needed is Ferguson gully. I understand that if the department were to accept the request of the local fishermen, a major expenditure would be involved. However, the first request has been amended and the fishermen will now be satisfied if the department will undertake an experiment and have a cut made through the sandbar in order to allow these fishermen to go out to the fishing grounds. I would ask the minister to advise us whether or not this project could be undertaken during the present summer.
The last fishing community which I shall mention at this time is Pigeon Hill. We have 55 fishing boats operating out of this community, and these fishermen have no shelter, no landing accommodation whatever. They have to launch their fishing craft every morning and beach them when they come back from the fishing grounds in the evening. This locality is along the shores of the gulf of St. Lawrence, and if the local fishermen were to leave their boats at anchor there would be a good chance the boats would be gone before morning. I know that the minister is aware of the situation at Pigeon Hill. I know that it could involve some major expenditure. I feel, however, that the expenditure is well warranted in view of the heavy production and the large number of fishing boats involved. I have been told that every morning the minister uses his canoe by means of which to go from his home to his office. If the minister were obliged to go through what our fishermen at Pigeon Hill are obliged to go through every morning he would be more fully aware of the situation.
I have here a picture which appeared in the newspaper Evangeline for Thursday, May 25. It shows these fishermen having to launch

Supply-Public Works
their boats loaded with traps. Here is a fishing boat 35 feet or 38 feet in length and loaded with 40 lobster traps. The fishermen have to go into the water up to their waists and be exposed to two-foot or three-foot waves, and on many occasions they are obliged to spend a whole day soaked to their waists. If, while launching their boats, the waves get over their high rubber boots and rubber suits, they are obliged to carry on fishing all day that way. If the minister had to get his feet wet, at least he could come to his office and in a warm spot dry off very quickly. For the information of the minister I am sending this picture over to him. It will give him firsthand information of the misery these fishermen are obliged to go through.
I am positive that the project at Pigeon Hill is not impossible. It is true that an engineering problem exists, but the engineers of his department in the past have taken care of problems which were just as serious as is the one at Pigeon Hill. I hope that this project will receive serious and early consideration.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: I should like to ask a question of the hon. member who has just taken his seat, if he does not mind. Since the hon. member always maintains that he is a good representative of New Brunswick, I should like to know why he did not ask for anything for the constituency of Restigouche-Mada-waska.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: As the bright boy has asked me this question, Mr. Chairman, I will tell the hon. member this. When we come to item 362 I may have a series of questions to address to the minister concerning the constituency of Restigouche-Madawaska.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: We have a good member. We do not need them.


Mr. McCleave:: First, I think the committee would be pleased to know that the minister has recently retrieved this famous canoe in which he moves to and from work. It apparently was lost, strayed or stolen a while back but now it has been returned safely and the minister is again paddling his own canoe.
I have two suggestions to make and I hope the minister will not tell me to paddle my own canoe. They will be short ones and I will not take too much of his time. The first is a request or a suggestion-and I made it some two years ago or three years ago- that more attention be paid to the problems of paraplegics when public buildings are designed. I know the minister has continued the program his precedessor followed of doing something for paraplegics, but there are still in this country a number of public buildings which are going up without due regard to

those unfortunates. There are ready architectural plans, for example, in all the buildings put up by the Department of Veterans Affairs. As I say these plans are available to the architects who design the other buildings. I hope the minister will aggressively see to it that all public buildings will have entrances that are suitable to paraplegics. When I went through Dalhousie law school I had the personal experience of helping to move into and out of the school a student who was a paraplegic. From that personal experience I know of the problems that face these people.
The second point, Mr. Chairman, deals with your grand province of Quebec. I should like to make this point in French except for the fact that, despite hard study, my French is of the nature that has to be translated in booths on both sides of the chamber. I will therefore make the remarks in English, if I may do so. I visited several places in Quebec recently and was somewhat surprised to find that companies which had set up what I suppose you would call the company style town, had incorporated the English Canadian style of architecture rather than the French Canadian style of architecture in their building development. This seemed to be most surprising. Subsequently I talked about this matter with officials of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation in order to ascertain whether there were any homes of distinctively French Canadian design that could qualify for Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation loans. I am informed that the corporation is doing all it can to encourage architects in Quebec to come up with homes of this style with a peculiarly Quebec flair. I hope the minister and Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation will encourage these architects to achieve something that will reach that goal.
(Translation):


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman. I should like to say a few words on the first vote of the Department of Public Works.
I shall start by mentioning an answer given by the minister (Mr. Walker). When replying to the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch), the minister repeated an accusation he made last year following a discussion concerning a contract which had not been awarded to the lowest tenderer.
The minister said then-and he repeated this accusation today-that the case referred to was excusable because the contractor who did not get the job did not have the ability required for carrying out the work.
The minister may have been ill-informed at the time, that is quite possible. But today,

he takes the same attitude, in spite of the evidence I supplied him with and which leaves no doubt with regard to Mr. Langlois. That is certainly unjustified.
I submit that this attempt to disprove our evidence is a clear case of intentional deceit.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Chairman, on a question of privilege.
The hon. member just accused the minister of intentional deceit. This is deliberately accusing the minister of being dishonest I believe his words are contrary to the rules of the house.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman-


Paul Raymond Martineau: I would ask the hon. member for Hull to retract his unkind words.


Alexis Pierre Caron: I said, Mr. Chairman, that the minister may have been ill-informed.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: No.


Alexis Pierre Caron: But when, after having received additional information, he persisted in this attitude, there was or there might have been, intentional deceit.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: You never said that; you said that there was intentional deceit.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Let us say that after getting additional information-


The Chairman:: Order. I think that the words used by the hon. member for Hull were to the effect that there was intentional deceit.
I wondered whether the hon. member would clearly state that he was not speaking of the minister. That is why I allowed him to comment on the point of order. I think he just confirmed that those were indeed the words he spoke, and that they were aimed at the minister.
I believe those words are not allowable under our rules and our practices. I shall therefore ask him to make the correction which is called for.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, I comply with your wish that I should withdraw the words which are said to be unparliamentary.
Nevertheless, I wish to show this house that the minister was not right in repeating today what he said a year ago on the basis of information which, according to me, could have been unjustified and unjustifiable.
He claimed that the person concerned was not qualified. I asked him at the time what was the basis for that statement. He then gave me the names of people who were supposed to have testified to that effect.
Supply-Public Works
I then wrote to those people and I received answers from everywhere and I had copies made which I sent to the minister himself to see what his reaction would be.
Here is a summary of the situation. I have here a letter from the C.N.R. over the signature of the building engineer-I sent a copy of it to the minister; therefore he cannot say that he did not get the information. 1 believe that the C.N.R. building engineer for the Moncton section is an honest and honourable man; therefore, since he has been given by the C.N.R. the responsibility of supervising construction projects, he should know what he is talking about when he says:
(Text):
As requested in your telegram, I am attaching to this letter a statement indicating that you completed the contract for the Canadian National Railways in a satisfactory manner.
(Translation):
Now, the Canadian National bank-


Mr. Lambert:: Mr. Chairman, as a matter of information, could the hon. member give us the date of the document he has just been quoting?


Alexis Pierre Caron: The date? Yes, it is July 12, 1960, from Moncton, N.B.
And now, from the Canadian National bank which had also been mentioned by the minister, I have received, under date of July 11, 1960-


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order-


Alexis Pierre Caron: Are you trying to stop me from making my speech?


Paul Raymond Martineau: I am rising on a point of order. The hon. member is repeating a point he raised in the house last year and to which the minister had replied, quoting nine examples. So I do not think it is in order for the hon. member to again bring up this point which had to do with last year's estimates, because in that case we could go on and on discussing what was discussed and voted in the house last year, not to mention the fact that the business of the house could not proceed.


Alexis Pierre Caron: On the point of order, Mr. Chairman, I am not-


Jacques Flynn: I think I may immediately indicate to the hon. member that in my view, the point of order raised by the hon. parliamentary secretary is not well taken, because this is not a closed debate.
I think the hon. member may go on.

Supply-Public Works


An hon. Member:: He is all wet.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Here, under date of July 12, 1960, is a letter signed by Mr. J. A. Grise, chief architect of the buildings service of the Canadian National bank, whose views must certainly be worthy of confidence. Here is what he says:
Contrary to the assertions of the minister based on inaccurate information he has received, this is to certify that Mr. Arthur Langlois, general contractor of Mont-Joli. has carried out extension and improvement works for the Canadian National bank in the year 1956, at the Canadian National bank building at Mont-Joli.
This job, which cost approximately $35,000 and consisted in building a new vault and carrying out improvements both inside and outside the building has been completed satisfactorily.
Signed: J. A. Grise,
Chief architect,
Canadian National Bank.
And I have here a telegram and confirmation from Mr. R. M. Wickwire, building engi-aeer, of Moncton, N.B., date July 12, 1960. I juote:
'Text):
This is to certify that Mr. Arthur Langlois constructed an extension to our express building at Mont Joli, Quebec, in 1956, valued at approximately $16,000. The contract was successfully completed in a workmanlike manner to the complete satisfaction of the railway.
(Translation):
And it is signed: R. M. Wickwire, building engineer.
I also have a letter from Mr. L. P. Martin, division engineer, C.N.R., Campbellton, New Brunswick, dated-
(Text):


David James Walker: On a point of order. The hon. member as reported at page 6472 of Hansard, read the letter which he has just read again into the record. It was read into the record a year ago. Now he proceeds to read another. Surely there is a rule against repetition of this kind. He was answered in full. We gave nine instances of the gross inefficiency of his friend who he wanted to have a contract.
The question I should like to ask the hon. member at this time, and one which I am constantly asked, is: has he 29 or 33 relatives in the civil service at the present time?
(Translation):


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: And his nephew-
(Text):


Alexis Pierre Caron: They can't call me Danny Boy. I shall speak first to the point of order and then I shall deal with the dirty way in which the minister deals with these matters. Yes, this was brought up before, in the previous session, but the minister came back today and repeated his statement when he should have known better than to do so, having
[The Chairman.]
received all those letters, because I have sent copies to the minister. Notwithstanding the copies I have sent him he came back today after the speech of the hon. member for Vancouver East. He came back again and repeated that the man was incompetent to do the job when he knows better, having received copies of all those letters. This is not considered to be fair play. This is hitting a man below the belt, and I cannot understand why an ex-boxer should behave in that way.
As for the relatives I have in the civil service, I do not know of many. But there is one thing I do know: I never recommended one single one. They have settled their own value and that is a lot better than the minister can say, because if he had not been the henchman of the government on the old printing bureau he would not be the minister today. That is the way it is-the henchman.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


David James Walker: On a point of order, we have 45 letters written by the hon. member for Hull to the George street office of the Department of Public Works alone since the 1957 election asking for jobs-


Jacques Flynn: Order. It seems that the question put by the minister was out of order. I have allowed the hon. member to reply because he was personally concerned. Now I hope we may come back to the discussion of the estimates of the Department of Public Works.


Harold Edward Winch: I rise on a question of privilege. Do I gather from what the minister said a moment ago that if an hon. member of this house by chance, or in any way at all, has a relative in the civil service that he should not be allowed to speak on any matter?


Jacques Flynn: The hon. member will agree, I hope, that this is not a question of privilege.


Harold Edward Winch: Then what is it? Did you hear the remark of the minister?


Jacques Flynn: I think the hon. member will agree that this is not a question of privilege.


Harold Edward Winch: Did you hear what the hon. member said?


Jacques Flynn: I heard what he said and I stated that in my view he was out of order. I allowed the hon. member to reply, but I think we should now proceed with the discussion of the estimates of the Department of Public Works.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have here a telegram of July 11, 1960, which the minister has received and which reads as follows:

Arthur Langlois,
253 St. Joseph Boulevard,
Hull, Quebec
This is to state that you have performed services for the Canadian National Railways in providing an extension to our express building at Mont Joli in 1956, value of contract being in the vicinity of $16,000, and that your work was very satisfactory.
M. B. Martin,
Division Engineer, C.N.R.
(Translation):
In answer to the insidious question of the Minister of Public Works-his questions are always insidious anyway-I wish to tell the house that when I got interested in that case, I had never seen nor met Mr. Langlois; I did not know him. Since then, I saw him only once and I cannot consider Mr. Langlois as a friend, although I would be happy to be in a position to say so, since I have seen him only once in my life.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: You should have seen him more often, you would be better informed then.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, my information is firsthand information and it is more accurate than whatever information the hon. member could give me.
Mr. Chairman, I continue-


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Act four.


Georges-J. Valade: Why don't you go mosquito hunting?


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, the minister has claimed that, notwithstanding the information I gave him, he obtained information to the effect that the school board of Ste. Flavie had not been satisfied with the work which was carried out for them. He repeated the same thing today. I cannot understand this stand on the part of a man who is supposed to know at least something of the law since, as I am told, he qualified as a lawyer at one time. I am surprised to hear him repeat today his claims in the very same terms, even though he has been given all the information. In fact, here is a part of the information he has received:
To whom it may concern.
Arthur Langlois:
We, the school board of Ste. Flavie, have accepted the tenders for various construction and repair work on four of our schools, and have been very satisfied with the work done. This gentleman has always abided by and respected his contracts; all the jobs he has done have been satisfactory to the Department of Education.
We therefore recommend Mr. Langlois as a builder with experience in all fields of construction. Moreover, I should add that I have known
Supply-Public Works
Mr. Langlois for 25 years, that he has done all sorts of construction work in our district, and that I wholeheartedly support the recommendation made by the members of the school board concerning Langlois' fulfilment of his contracts and the interest he takes in his work.
(Signed) Yvon Pelletier, farmer.
And now, Mr. Chairman-


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Is that Mr. Honore Pelletier.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, the minister has said that Mr. Langlois had worked for a certain Eugene Belisle. This is what Mr. Eugene Belisle states:
The undersigned declare that they were satisfied with the work carried out by Mr. Arthur Langlois, general contractor.
(signed) Eugene Belisle
of Eugene Belisle & Fils Auto Limitee
Mont Joli.
The Mutual Life of Canada wrote to Mont Joli-
I am sorry, according to the minister, an agent of the Mutual Life of Canada, Mr. Dumais, had a house built by Mr. Langlois and he suggested that the work was badly done and that he had to have it done over again. This is entirely false and there is more than that. In that case, a house was built through a C.M.H.C. loan and since work carried out under such a loan is closely supervised in general, it is rather difficult for a contractor to get away with an unsatisfactory job. At any rate, this is what Mr. Dumais, who had a house built by Mr. Langlois, wrote:
Further to your letter of the 22nd Instant, It is a pleasure for me to express my appreciation and that of the many friends who visited my house. As a contractor, you have fully met your obligations. The architect's specifications have been followed. The quality of the materials fully met C.M.H.C. requirements.
I trust that this letter will be useful to you as I am convinced that you will give them full satisfaction.
(Signed) R. Dumais.
Mr. Chairman, I could quote many more letters, but I am satisfied that I have made it abundantly clear, through letters from responsible and competent people, that the minister was not justified last year and that he was even less justified to bring up this matter again this year, since he had received copy of all this information.
Would it be to justify himself for having granted a contract to a person who had not submitted the lowest tender, to please a member of parliament? If so, that is no excuse, in my opinion. Let him take his responsibilities before the public; he should not accuse

Supply-Public Works
others of incompetence when, in fact, he is the one who is incompetent. If any one is incompetent in this house, it is the present Minister of Public Works and he should not come here and accuse honest people and reflect on their reputation to hide his own incompetence.
In my opinion, the minister's attitude is not justified. Mr. Chairman, I could quote many more letters and evidence like I did last year but I think it would be useless to go any further. The minister has a copy of all that information, yet he is not satisfied with that. He repeats today what he said last year, knowing full well that it is false.
Mr. Chairman, I do not know how you would express yourself in such a case, but I say it is not honourable for a member of parliament or a minister to say such things after having been provided with information-


Paul Raymond Martineau: On a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman.


Jacques Flynn: I think I know what words the hon. parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister takes exception to and I feel the hon. member for Hull (Mr. Caron) will agree with me that an hon. member cannot imply that another hon. member has said something which he knows is false, and then add that such conduct is not honourable. I feel both expressions are unparliamentary and would ask the hon. member to correct them.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, I will correct my statement. I state that with all the information I gave him, the minister had every reason to believe that it was not false, and that his conduct was absolutely honourable. (Text):


David James Walker: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, I should like to say that I could even go out under the circumstances and get a recommendation for the hon. member for Hull, but it would not mean anything. (Translation):


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, seeing how some hon. members are trying to bring the house down, I am happy that I was busy at something else and failed to hear the remarks of the Minister of Public Works. I am sure they were absolutely insipid since they seem to appeal to those who were applauding.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Tell us something about your nephew, Mr. Jean Lupien, who works for C.M.H.C.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Now, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm

(Mr. Pigeon) apologized last year for having made such a reference, and he is at it again. He knows perfectly well and he has admitted as much to me, that I had nothing to do, neither directly nor indirectly with the employment of my nephew by C.M.H.C. in Montreal or in Ottawa.
Well, after admitting that he knew that, he butts in with the same matter, which indicates how far he can go.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I rise on a question of privilege.


Alexis Pierre Caron: There is no question of privilege.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a question of privilege.
The hon. member for Hull (Mr. Caron) is attacking my reputation. I took the hon. member's word, still it seems strange that, as I have said, his nephew was in fact granted a key position with the government. It is shocking.


Jacques Flynn: Order. What the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm has said after rising on a question of privilege is proof enough that there is no question of privilege, since the hon. member for Hull said nothing which could be construed as a reflection on the reputation of the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm.


Maurice Bourget: You are always off the track.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, I am very fond of the songs coming from the extreme left of the house-


An hon. Member:: You have a better voice yourself.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Yes, my voice is more powerful.


Georges-J. Valade: A mosquito voice.


Alexis Pierre Caron: We have just heard the mosquito voice. Nevertheless, the contract was awarded, not to the lowest bidder, but to the highest.


Georges-J. Valade: Try to be honest, and say what you have to say.


Alexis Pierre Caron: I said it was in your riding that the contract was awarded to the highest instead of the lowest bidder, and that the minister was compelled to take this step in order to please the hon. member.

Supply-Public Works


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Chairman, I must raise a Mr. Valade: Prove that it happened in my point of order.	riding.


Alexis Pierre Caron: There is no point of order here.


Georges-J. Valade: The hon. member for Hull, in his mental aberration, has laid a charge against me. I ask him to make himself clear or withdraw what he said.


An hon. Member:: He had better go mosquito hunting.


Alexis Pierre Caron: I see, Mr. Chairman, that you did not understand, neither did I.
(Text):
Oh yes, there are quite a few reasons, especially when they come from the Union Nationale party.
(Translation):


Jacques Flynn: Order. May I call upon the members to let the hon. member who has the floor continue his speech without interrupting him, especially when those interruptions have no other result than to cause the debate to drift into other channels, or, to continue the allegory into foreign seas.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Maybe it is to give him something to think about.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman-


Georges-J. Valade: On a question of privilege. The member for Hull referred a moment ago to my riding. He said that in my riding contracts had been given for a price, I do not know what price, but I believe he referred to contracts which were awarded in the riding I represent. I would ask him to prove what he says and to avoid making allegations that reflect upon my reputation and my county.


Jacques Flynn: Order. The fact that a member states that a contract has been awarded in the riding of another member cannot reflect on the reputation of that hon. member. However, if the hon. member wishes to put a question to the hon. member for Hull and if the latter one allows it, it would be quite in order.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Mr. Chairman, on the question of privilege, the member for Hull actually said that a contract had been awarded to the highest tenderer in the constituency of St. Mary in order to please the hon. member for that riding. I did hear that statement made by the member for Hull, who should not make such statements without being able to prove them. Put up or shut up!


Some hon. Members:: Then prove what you say.


Alexis Pierre Caron: You want to know if I can prove it. There was for the Hudson Heights post office-


Georges-J. Valade: In St. Marv'


Some hon. Members:: That is far from St. Mary. You do not know your geography.


Alexis Pierre Caron: In any case, I meant the Hudson Heights post office, and the tenderer was Stuart and Stuart, of Montreal, who bid $23,825; the second was Gray and Gareau, of Hudson, $21,650; the third, S. R. Wilson, of Hudson Heights, $19,950; and the fourth, Arthur Langlois, of Ste. Rose-de-Lima, $16,750. The contract was awarded to the one who had bid $19,950, that is to say he had admitted a price of $3,200 more than the lowest bidder, and the minister, at the time, told us it was because the lowest bidder was incompetent.
I say the minister was mistaken and that he had no right to repeat the same thing.
Furthermore, in Hudson, another contract was awarded-
(Text):


David James Walker: On a point of order, I repeat, Mr. Chairman, this was all gone into in ex-tenso last year. The hon. member for Hull is still speaking in connection with his same inefficient friend who did not get that contract at Hudson because of his gross inefficiency. This matter was raised last year in the consideration of my estimates and we spent hours on it. My point is this. We have had not one word from the hon. member for Hull on the estimates this year until today. Surely there is a limit, Mr. Chairman, to the distance to which you will allow the hon. member for Hull, who has a loud voice and a vacant mind, to go.


Alexis Pierre Caron: I brought up this matter because of the answer the minister gave to the hon. member for Vancouver East. The minister rose and repeated the same accusation against Mr. Langlois that he made last year. I admitted at the time that it might have been because of his lack of information, but since then I have sent the minister all the details but he has not changed his views. The minister rose in his place today and repeated the same accusation. I believe this is the same kind of hitting below the belt that no boxer would accept in any boxing match. This is what the minister has done. He has claimed that in the past he was a prize fighter but I do not accept the fact that I cannot answer the accusation made by the minister in

Supply-Public Works
this committee. He has repeated today the accusations he made unjustly last year. I did not think he knew the tacts at that time. Since then he has had the information and he had no right to repeat the accusation. The best thing he could have done would have been to remain silent and not say anything at all. It had not been mentioned up to that time but in answering the hon. member for Vancouver East who asked whether there were any privileged contractors or privileged tenderers the minister said to the hon. member, if there is any information that you have will you bring it to me as some others have done. He said "last year the member for Hull brought some information and I could show him that the man was incompetent". This is why I have to object to what the minister said.
(Translation):
I may also talk about that.


Some hon. Members:: Talk about the printing bureau.


Maurice Bourget: You said it, we are going to talk about it.


Alexis Pierre Caron: And I duly intend to talk about it.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Creeks in the basement.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Those words of the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm prove that he is utterly ignorant.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: On a point of order, I feel that this debate has degenerated into the kind of debates conducted by the Union Nationale, which should not be tolerated in this chamber.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Chairman, usually I have respect for older people, but the malicious insinuation made by the hon. member for Cochrane (Mr. Habel) is an insult to a million Quebec voters who supported the Union Nationale party, which certainly gave us a good government while it was in power, and the hon. member who has just spoken should be the last to say such things on the floor of the house. He should be ashamed.


Jacques Flynn: Order. I think it would be proper to invite the hon. members generally to be a little calmer, and especially on a point of order not to introduce into the debate completely irrelevant facts, which in turn are followed by others; there results a chain reaction which again makes us wander from the estimates of the Department of Public Works.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Well, Mr. Chairman-


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: I rise on a question of privilege. I suggest to the hon. members and my colleagues present that even though the hon. member for Hull has quite a loud voice, which perhaps brings a little more animation into the debate, that it is not a good enough reason for the hon. member for Cochrane-


Jacques Flynn: Order.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: I am rising on a question of privilege-


Jacques Flynn: Order.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Mr. Chairman, I rise-


Jacques Flynn: Order. I have already given my ruling on the matter raised by the hon. member for Cochrane and I should like again-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Jacques Flynn: Order. I ask the hon. members, particularly the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville-


Maurice Bourget: Hear, hear.


Jacques Flynn: -to help the Chair maintain order and to allow the discussion to continue in an atmosphere of, shall I say, relative calm, so that the hon. members may follow the discussion.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, I have always shown a good example, but if my voice is maybe a little louder than most, I cannot reproach the Good Lord when he gave me that advantage.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: It must be used wisely.


Alexis Pierre Caron: I have never interrupted an hon. member who was speaking in this house, and you know it, Mr. Chairman.
I had the patience to wait till he had finished his remarks and then 1 rose to reply.
If they go on interrupting me, Mr. Chairman, I hope you will allow me to go beyond the narrow field of this debate on public works and answer freely all questions that will be put to me, for it is so easy to do so.
If I do not have the time to do it in my first half hour, I will take a second, a third and even a twelfth half hour, if necessary.
I certainly do not intend to be intimidated by anyone, especially by such inexperienced members who have so much to learn.


Georges-J. Valade: We are not here to be intimidated by the hon. member for Hull.


Jacques Flynn: I had allowed the hon. member tor Hull a few minutes to resume his subject. However, I realize he is still discussing the points of order.


Alexis Pierre Caron: I will come back tonight, Mr. Chairman and resume the subject.
(Text):


Mr. Peters:: Carry on.


Jacques Flynn: The hon. member for Waterloo North.


William Arnold Peters: Agreement to carry on.


Mr. Weichel:: Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to take part in the discussion of the estimates of the Department of Public Works. Although my remarks will be brief, I feel I have some interesting items to bring up. As I am appreciative of the co-operation I have received from the minister and officials of his department, it is only right and proper that I should extend my sincere thanks during the consideration of these estimates.
Some time ago several officials of the department and of the Toronto office along with post office officials visited Waterloo North for the purpose of purchasing land which in the near future will be used for new post office buildings in the twin cities of Kitchener and Waterloo. Kitchener, a city of 75,000 or more, has doubled its population during the last 25 years, and the property which has been secured is well situated in the busy section of the city. I understand that plans are now under way to start this building in the fall. When completed it should be a fine addition to the city which is well known throughout Canada for its progress in manufacturing, educational facilities-


William Arnold Peters: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, a question has been raised this afternoon about members reading their speeches. While I do not want to be restrictive, I believe it should be made clear that if it is not correct for one member to do so it is not correct for other members to do the same thing. This should be brought to the attention of members.


John Cameron Pallett: On the point of order raised by the hon. member, may I say that I have been listening to the hon. member who now has the floor. I have noticed that he has not been reading his speech and has only referred to a few notes that he has. I think I am in a better position to observe the hon. member than the hon. member for Timiskaming is.


Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Chairman, I should like to speak to the point of order too, and I only do so because I think it is something that should not come up. When the point was
Supply-Public Works
raised by the hon. member for Brome-Missis-quoi, I deliberately left my seat and went behind the hon. member to see whether he was reading and every word was typewritten, so the point of order is correct. I would not have raised it if that member had not brought it up.


Georges-J. Valade: On the same point, Mr. Chairman, I have seen the hon. member who has raised this point reading all through debates on divorces.


William Arnold Peters: On a point of order, that was not in my speech. I did not write the remarks I was reading on those occasions.


Jacques Flynn: Order. The hon. member for Waterloo North may explain.


Oscar William Weichel: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I understand that plans are under way to start this building in the fall. When completed it should make a very fine addition to this city which is well known throughout Canada for its progress in manufacturing, educational facilities and other worth-while fields.
Waterloo, the twin city of Kitchener, has doubled its population during the last ten years. This is probably a record in Canada and the need for a new post office here has been of the utmost importance. This city is known as the Hartford of Canada because of its many insurance companies, and its growth in population together with the great strides it has made in manufacturing also substantiate my remarks respecting the need of greater postal facilities. The land chosen for the building is ideally situated and when the post office is completed it should make a fine contribution to service and the appearance of that part of the city.
For many years the village of Wellsley has had very poor postal facilities. This has been corrected and the people there now enjoy a new post office. My home town of Elmira has also benefited from the program of the government and the Minister of Public Works in that improvements of real value to the community have been made in respect of our federal building.
Perhaps I should say a word or two about Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation which comes under the minister's department and which has played a great part in housing and other facilities for our senior citizens and other citizens. Recently Mr. Mervin Woods, Q.C., popular president of the Canadian Legion of Canada, officially opened the elderly persons' homes of which I am a director. These homes are an example of what can be done for our senior citizens so far as their problems as to low-rent housing are concerned.

Supply-Public Works
The young men's club of Kitchener recently opened a similar home which is a credit to the club and is much appreciated by the community as a whole. I could go on and mention many other worthwhile efforts that have received the assistance of the minister and his department. However, in closing may I again express my sincere appreciation to the minister and his staff for every consideration extended to me and my community.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Chairman, I should like to bring up at this time a number of matters that are of interest to the constituency which I represent in the House of Commons.


William Arnold Peters: Don't read your speech.


Mr. Marlin (Essex Easl):: As the hon. member has said, I shall do my best to follow my notes and not to read carefully from any text. The minister may perhaps be aware that I have had some correspondence with the director of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. However, in the event that he is not aware of the exchange of correspondence that I have had with that distinguished public servant I should like to mention a matter that is of considerable concern to many of the people who live in certain sections of my riding and who are living in houses that come under Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation through the credits these persons have received in the building of these homes as a result of the legislation which the minister administers. This has to do with some inadequacies in some of the apparatus that goes into these houses. I have had a number of petitions which I have passed on to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation regarding the construction of many of these houses. These petitions relate to such things as faulty eavestroughs, downspouts, condensation on the ceilings, and particularly to hot water tanks. I should say I have had over 200 different such cases brought to my attention.
I know that the matter is not one that is easily dealt with because it is a matter involving housing inspection. However, I believe, since the government is prepared under legislation that exists to assist in the construction of homes as a guarantor, we have an obligation to see that the standards laid down by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation are observed. In the case of the hot water tanks, for instance, the argument is made that there is a guarantee in some cases for as long as 10 years, but it is only regarded by the corporation as a standard of a recommendatory character. In some cases defects have shown up in the course of less than a year. I am sure that what

I say applies not only to my constituency but to other sections of the city of Windsor as well as other communities in Canada. I do not want to overstate the case and I do not want to hurt any builder unduly or unfairly, but I am sure many hon. members have had the experience of people going into houses where the construction has been faulty, where hot water tanks and the like have been faulty.
It seems to me that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation could do something more than merely express the view that these standards are recommendatory. I realize there is an important policing job here. The minister will recall that last year I urged upon him that steps ought to be taken to avoid discrimination in the matter of any individual being denied the opportunity to obtain credit for the purpose of building a house. At any rate, the initial view of the minister was that this was a provincial matter. The minister did, finally, find a method of coping with the problem. I am suggesting to him that in this kind of situation some effort ought to be made to see that builders do live up to the standards laid down by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I would ask the minister to have this matter referred once more to the director for all the data I have supplied to the latter in this matter.


David James Walker: May I ask the hon. member a question? I do not appear to have any correspondence with the hon. member on this subject-


Murdo William Martin: No, I have corresponded with the director.


David James Walker: If the hon. member wanted to bring it to my attention, would it not be better if he had done so through these 200 complaints he received? May I ask him also whether or not he brought to the attention of anyone in our department the 200 complaints, giving the names and addresses of the complainants?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes. If my hon. friend will refer to his director, he will find that I have had correspondence with him as late as June 8. I have had correspondence from him on May 2 and the director has before him the petition which I sent dated March 23 in respect of one phase of the construction of many of these houses.
I suggest to the minister that the attitude he should take is not one of belligerency with regard to this matter; that is not the approach that I made. If he wants to debate this matter on these terms, then I am prepared. Unfortunately, the manner of the minister in connection with every question that comes up, is that of taking a belligerent,

personal attitude instead of taking the attitude that he will do the best he can in particular situations.


David James Walker: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, all I am asking is whether there is a record of the 200 names and addresses. I infer from the answer of the hon. member that there is not.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I did not say that.
I said if the hon. gentleman will look at the correspondence-


David James Walker: You said there was.


Paul Joseph James Martin: -he will see that I have sent the petition in question to the director, and I think most of the names are on it. Most of these people will be found living on Belleperche place in Riverside. Some of them live on Laporte avenue, some of them on Vimy in old Walkerville. The only point I am seeking to bring to the minister's attention is that he should not be unduly sensitive. His department does lay down standards as to the kind of heating equipment, for instance, that should be installed and this is one of the main sources of complaint. These heaters, guaranteed by the builders, are not living up to expectations. They cost quite a lot of money, a large sum of money for many of these people. In many cases, they have had to be replaced. I am simply saying to the minister, will he not give consideration to taking steps to see to it that through Central Mortgage inspection service or some other method, the corporation takes steps to see that the standards laid down by it are observed by the builders.
This is not an unreasonable request to make of the minister. I find it very difficult to understand this sudden display of belligerency with regard to so reasonable a request which I put in a reasonable way. I can only attribute the minister's petulance to the fact that he has had a hard afternoon, one which has tried his patience and disposition. He is taking this out on me. Why should he want to take it out on me? I do not understand it.
However, I hope he will not mind if I make this plea on behalf of my constituents who spent much of their hard earned money in the purchase of these homes and who find that the guarantees are not being met. As a result, they have had to spend considerable sums of money, away beyond original estimates. All I am asking the minister is to be good enough, as the minister of the crown in charge of this operation, to see whether some improvement can be made in the way this particular matter is handled. I am not complaining about the director. The director, in my judgment, is one of the most
Supply-Public Works
efficient men in the public service. I am not complaining about any of the officials. However, I believe that where standards are recommendatory, the department ought to take steps to see that some of these irritations are eliminated.
I must say that in one case I brought to the attention of the director, he did act expeditiously. He did send someone there, and as a result a correction was made. I refer to the case of a gentleman who does not even live in my constituency, but lives on Everett street in Sandwich West. As a result of the director's intervention, a correction was made. I am simply asking that a practice be established for meeting that kind of a situation as a rule, and not merely upon request.
The minister may have a good answer.
I do not know why he should get all hot and bothered simply because a member of parliament puts to him, as a representative of the crown, a request on behalf of his constituents who feel that they have been aggrieved. The minister also will not mind, I hope, if I bring to his attention another matter which I mentioned last year. It is only because I think this is a legitimate request that I make it again. I hope the minister, who is an old friend of mine of many years' standing, will not think that I am unfair in making a request of him. After all, I am a member of this house. I do represent some people in this house, and I think I have a right to address myself to the minister. I know he is overburdened. I know that he is exercised today. I know he has been unduly agitated. However, I have not added to that agitation. I do not know why he should be so greatly disturbed because I seek to bring these matters to his attention. I am referring now to Belle River. To illustrate how I feel towards the minister, I ask him to come down to Essex East some time and to let me take him through my constituency. I should like to take him to Belle River. His able deputy knows about Belle River. I am sure that he would recommend to the minister a visit of this kind. I think the minister would find that my association with him would not be altogether unpleasant in the circumstances.
I should like to show him some work of reconstruction of the dock at Belle River. I am grateful for the work which has been authorized and which is a continuation of the work that proceeded under the former government. However, I would suggest to the minister that Belle River, being perhaps the most important location or meeting place for all kinds of watercraft, should receive special consideration. It is the most natural harbour of its kind in the rural sections of the county. In the summer thousands of summer craft of all kind ply back and forth on lake St.
6410	HOUSE OF
Supply-Public Works
Clair on which Belle River is situated. It seems to me that to improve the dock facilities there would have the effect of attracting increasing numbers of tourists and this would greatly assist the community of Belle River.
I am asking the minister to take a second look at the proposal which was made by the chamber of commerce and by other citizens in Belle River and which was strongly supported by me and I believe also, as a friend of the court, by the hon. member for Essex West. This was a proposition involving an expenditure of a large sum of money, admittedly but one which in time, I am sure, would have justified the expenditure.
When the minister is looking at this matter, I wish he would also give consideration to the desirability of building a post office at Belle River. I know that this is not the minister's entire responsibility. However, if he would discuss that matter with the Postmaster General I am sure that they would both agree, after getting their heads together. Perhaps if they would be good enough to call me in, I would be able to help and we might possibly find ways and means of building a post office in that thriving community.
When the minister is doing that, I hope also he will look at the proposal I made for the building of a post office in Sandwich East. That township of Sandwich East is one of the townships in Essex county in which the increase of population has been very great in the last few years. I think that community also deserves a post office.
I should be very grateful to the minister if he would look into these matters and I say this sincerely. I do not expect him to give an immediate reply. One could not expect him to have all of these matters ready at hand, although it may be that he anticipated that I might make a modest intervention today and that on that account he would be prepared to meet me headlong. If that was the case I should be very happy. I should be honoured to think that these various proposals which I put forward for my constituency loomed so large in his consideration.
I hope the minister will understand the spirit in which I have put forward these requests. I put them forward in the hope that they will receive his serious consideration.
I would say to him that nothing would give me greater pleasure than to have him visit this area, knowing how much he likes good swimming water and how much he likes water in which he can operate a craft that he can handle. We do not have many canoes on lake St. Clair but we have other kinds of water craft. I should be happy to take him along the shores of lake St. Clair and to show him Belle River and other areas in my constitu-


ency that border on lake St. Clair. As a result of the convivial spirit which that kind of confrontation would bring, I am sure that the minister and I would understand one another better politically and better as men in public life. The consequence would be that he would not place any obstacle in the way of my realizing every one of these requests which I have put forward to him today and which I might on some other occasion again put forward. I hope the minister will give these matters his consideration. I am glad to see the minister smiling. I am sure that the waters now have been smoothed, that he bears no animosity towards me or towards the hon. member for Hull, that everything is serene, and that we can now proceed constructively with our work.
(Translation):


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Chairman, like the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin), I am also, I hope and believe, a great friend of the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Walker).
Even if I plead my case with some force, I will certainly lack the great eloquence of the hon. member for Essex East.
Mr. Chairman, I think it would be appropriate now to call it six o'clock.
(Text):
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 7.30 p.m. (Translation):
William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Chairman, when the house took recess at six o'clock, I recalled that it is always difficult for a member to rival the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin) in eloquence, especially when no controversial point is at issue.
Mr. Chairman, at this stage of my remarks, I should like to take this opportunity to thank, through the minister, the officials of the Department of Public Works for the courtesy they have shown me in my work for the benefit of my fellow citizens of Brome-Missisquoi. I refer particularly to the officials of the Montreal district office. In so far as they are allowed to do so under the existing regulations, they have always looked favourably upon my requests. They have always received my representations with great courtesy; therefore, through the minister and on behalf of all my fellow citizens, I should like to thank them sincerely for their cooperation.
Mr. Chairman, I was pleased to see in the estimates an item for the construction of a retaining wall along the Yamaska river, in

Farnham. On behalf of the people of that community as well as on my own behalf, I wish to take this opportunity to thank the minister. I am sure the construction of that retaining wall on the Yamaska will soon be undertaken.
(Text):
I was very interested to hear the minister explain to the committee how tenders are awarded and how bids are received. I think everyone in this committee and the country in general will realize that a most wise and scrupulous procedure continues to be followed in this regard. I would only say this- that when it is at all feasible and in accord with sound economics and the regulations of the department, local work should be given to local people. I have said this both inside and outside the house and I am not shy about doing so.
On some occasions, and particularly with regard to larger contracts costing over $15,000 it is only sound economics, I know, to proceed as the minister has stated, but I repeat that whenever it is in accord with sound economics and within the regulations, the importance of giving local work to local people should be stressed. I think this is a good principle to follow in general and it certainly creates good public relations for the department. In the estimates this year, as was the case in past years, there is again an item of $100,000 for improvements to the warehouse facilities in relation to the customs house and warehouse at the border point at Phillipsburg in my constituency in Quebec. I know many complications have arisen and I am not blaming anybody here at all. Successive provincial governments have had difficulty in determining where the highway should go through that border point. Then, again, it is a large border point involving problems concerning citizenship, immigration, customs and so on. But as I notice this item has occurred in the estimates once again this year I hope all possible action is taken to get this work under way as soon as possible.
In closing I should like to refer to the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I may say briefly in passing that I do not think anything could be much more important in this nation today, certainly in a domestic and economic sense, than house building. I feel the benefits of home ownership are such that we cannot stress them too greatly. I do not think I am exaggerating when I say that a man who owns his own home or has a pros-spect of owning it takes a greater interest in the affairs of his own community. I think it has always been a principle of the government and of the party which I support that home ownership and the rights of property
Supply-Public Works
are matters to which very serious attention must be paid.
In the past, for various reasons, it has been difficult to attract housing money into rural areas. I am not blaming anybody for this, but the facts are there. I should like to congratulate the minister and his department for the initiative they have shown up to now, initiative which will make it easier for people living in rural areas to obtain housing money.
I know the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has only a limited number of personnel. However, I should like to thank the minister and his department for initiating a series of visits from the Sherbrooke office to my own particular area at Cowansville. I mention Cowansville because it is centrally located in my constituency.
Up to now it has been very difficult for the citizens, of Brome-Missisquoi, no matter what their walk of life, to have housing loans processed and to obtain information. Because of the initiative of the minister and his department we have had officials from the Sherbrooke office visting Cowansville and interviewing the people of my constituency on an experimental basis. While this is in the experimental stage, I am convinced that it will work because there is need in my constituency for this type of approach, and I certainly hope in the future that these visits will be put on a permanent basis.
I feel that in many rural areas the need for increased housing is evident, and that once visits such as I have referred to are put on a permanent basis applications and information will be forthcoming.
(Translation):
That is why I wish to take this opportunity to thank the minister and his officials for their initiative.
(Text):
Mr. Chairman, in summing up, I support the principle of local work for local people. I hope that the project in relation to the customs building at Phillipsburg will be speeded up. Again I urge that in the future more Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation assistance be provided in the rural areas in general and, I hope, in my area in particular.
I should like again to say that the party I support and the government in authority today realize the importance of home ownership and the importance of home building to the economy of our country.


An hon. Member:: Give the kid a hand.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Chevrier:: Mr. Chairman, I intervene in this debate on the estimates of the Department of Public Works at this time to discuss a matter of particular importance to

Supply-Public Works
a certain group of people and, I am sure, to the department, as well as to myself.
I have reference to an item in the estimates in relation to the harbours and rivers engineering services. Normally I should wait to discuss this matter until we were considering that item but because of the sittings of the committee, on railways, air lines and other agencies owned and operated by the government, of which I am a member, I feel that this is the only time at which I can discuss this matter.
The minister over a period of months, and I believe longer, has received representations from the Cornwall industrial development commission for the establishment of wharfing facilities at Cornwall.
I have indicated during the discussion on previous occasions of the estimates of the minister that the committee and the department might well have given consideration to a suggestion which had been made earlier by myself for the establishment of an economic survey to deal with the effect of the St. Lawrence seaway upon the area which it traverses. While that recommendation was approved unanimously by the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines, no action was taken in respect to it.
There was a recommendation approved not long ago by the same committee, also unanimously, to increase the directors of the Canadian National Railways from seven to 12. Although there was very little discussion of that matter it was approved immediately. However, my suggestion fell by the wayside.
The Department of Public Works did set up a committee to consider, in conjunction I understand with the Department of Transport, the advisability of the establishment of port facilities along the front of the seaway extending from Dorion on the east as far as Oshawa, I believe.
When the minister replies to these suggestions he might give us a detailed report in respect to what has happened to the recommendations of this committee, in addition to what is being done at Cornwall, of course. There the department has decided to build a wharf. There is in the estimates the sum of $300,000 for that purpose.
The construction of that wharf was recommended in a brief presented to the Department of Public Works by the industrial commission for the city of Cornwall to illustrate the immediate need for a wharf and deep sea water facilities in that area. That was also recommended by the Cornwall industrial development corporation.
At this stage I should like to pause for a moment and place on the record a statement contained in a speech I made on September

11, 1956 on the occasion of the ceremony of laying the cornerstone of the headquarters building at Cornwall. That paragraph reads as follows:
What I have said of Canada applies in a proportionate degree to Cornwall. Its growth in the last quarter of a century has been remarkable. Today it is the fastest growing community in eastern Ontario, it is an important industrial centre-it could become a port bustling with activity. There was a time when the wharf at the foot of Pitt street was the busiest place in town. At the turn of the century, following the construction of the 14 foot canal through this area, Cornwall thrived from water transportation. With the coming of the railways and the construction of modern highways, competition from these forms of transportation was faster and more efficient and water transportation in this area became a poor third. But here is an opportunity and a great one to regain our long lost prestige on the water. We are bringing deep sea navigation right up to your door. There is a natural harbour from St. Lawrence park to Gray's creek. Get the business, get the industries and soon a port will flourish and thrive on your waterfront. Here you will have to rely upon your own initiative. The government cannot be expected to build navigation facilities which will attract industry and at the same time develop a port on your waterfront. Here is an opportunity to exercise the drive and energy I referred to earlier.
The government and the seaway authority have confidence in the future of Cornwall. Not only have they made sure that deep water navigation will be available to you but they have selected this city as the headquarters of the seaway authority. When the seaway is completed, its operations will be directed from here and for that purpose we have erected on this site a modern and efficient building.
Even before that the Canadian National Railways had conducted a survey of the proposed deep waterway project and its effect upon the community of Cornwall. This survey was prepared by the development branch of the department of research and development of the Canadian National Railways in September, 1953, and among the many recommendations it made, the following recommendation appeared:
2. That the zoning authorities for greater Cornwall be advised to protect for industrial use, by restrictive zoning, an area of about 1,000 acres beyond the growing housing development east of Courtaulds and lying between the present Canadian National Railways main line and the St. Lawrence river.
This area, which that branch of the Canadian National Railways recommended, is not far east of the area in which the Department of Public Works intends to build this wharf. My purpose in referring to this recommendation is that, acting upon it, the city council at that time expropriated, or took an option, on the property referred to by the Canadian National Railways, which is roughly speaking, a mile or more downstream from the present wharf which is being built by the department. At this point the deep water facilities range anywhere from 23 feet to 42 feet in

depth. Therefore, there was not any doubt
that deep-sea vessels could come into that area.
I raise this point not because I have any complaints to make about the site chosen by the Department of Public Works. On the contrary, I think the question is one for the local authorities, the city and those who are concerned, to determine. If at a later date the city fathers saw fit to believe that the recommendations made by the Canadian National Railways were not applicable in 1960 or 1961, I certainly have no fault to find. I think the decision of the industrial development corporation in selecting that area, having regard to the circumstances and the time at which it was done, is perhaps superior today to the recommendation made by the Canadian National Railways. I say that because the industrial development corporation purchased a number of mills. It purchased the Canada mill and the Dundas mill for industrial development purposes, and then they got the idea of developing the wharf, which to my mind is an excellent one, and they should be commended for it. The industrial development corporation deserves a great deal of commendation for the interest it is taking in the development of industry in that vicinity.
My particular purpose in rising is that it has been repeated in the house and elsewhere that if there has been a decline in business activity in the community of Cornwall it is due to the St. Lawrence seaway. No statement could be further from the truth. The statement is inaccurate. It is one which should be challenged in the light of the development that is being carried on by the Department of Public Works in the eastern part of the city of Cornwall.
It has been stated also that the economy of Cornwall declined because the St. Lawrence seaway canals were put on the United States side of the line. This statement is also inaccurate. If I go back to history I can show that the statement is inaccurate. The 1932 United States-Canada agreement provided for a two-stage development of power and navigation in that area. It provided for one canal on the United States side at Barnhart island and the other canal on the Canadian side at Chrysler island upstream from Cornwall. The 1941 agreement provided for both canals on the United States side. The 1954 proposal to the international joint commission provided for an undertaking by Canada that it would build all the facilities on the Canadian side of the line, but as the committee knows, following the meetings that took place between the United States representatives and the Canadian representatives, it was decided to build one canal and
Supply-Public Works
two locks opposite Barnhart island on the United States side and one canal and one lock at Iroquois on the Canadian side. And Canada undertook to continue 14 foot navigation on the Canadian side at Cornwall. Therefore, there is now not only a deep channel of 27 feet not very far from the wharf which the department is building but also a canal 14 feet in depth upstream from that area.
It has been said that little or no traffic goes through that canal now. I mention this because it has a great deal to do with the wharf which the department is building. Fortunately, because of the 27 foot facilities which are practically opposite the wharf which is being built, there will have to be little or no dredging. In fact, the wharf comes practically to the end of the 27 foot facilities. This will enable deep-sea ships to go right to the wharf when the department is building.
Since it has been stated in the house and outside that because of the seaway the traffic has diminished tremendously I should like to put on Hansard figures indicating the amount of local traffic that went through the Cornwall canal from 1947 to 1959. These figures have been obtained from the St. Lawrence seaway authority, statistics section. They are dated August 18, 1960. I should like the permission of the committee to place these figures on Hansard.


Gordon Campbell Chown: If the hon. member wishes to have these figures included in Hansard I shall have to ask for the permission of the committee. Is it agreed that the hon. member may place this table on Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The table referred to above, follows:]
Local traffic Cornwall canal 1947-1959 (tons)
Year	Loaded Unloaded
1947	
2,422	151,5291948	
-	173,7161949	
-	598,3321950	
736	290,1271951	
1,001	323,2731952	
1,319	254,9631953	
2,317	282,1621954	
2,085	276,5311955	
2,137	332,8801956	
1,500	452,2381957	
1,289	469,3631958	
-	271,8411959	
-	181,950
St. Lawrence seaway authority statistics section,
August 18, 1960.


Lionel Chevrier: I should say that, roughly speaking, over the 12 years I have mentioned

Supply-Public Works the unloaded traffic averaged about 300,000 tons a year. Since the seaway has been in operation the St. Lawrence seaway authority, in their present traffic report, namely that for 1960, have produced the figures of the cargo tons going through the Cornwall canal for the year 1960. I should now like to compare the first figures with those for the year 1960 which are also taken from the traffic report of the St. Lawrence seaway authority, 1960. I would ask permission of the committee to have these figures put on Hansard as well.


Mr. Brunsden:: Will the hon. member read them?


Gordon Campbell Chown: Will the hon. member indicate just how substantial the table is?


Lionel Chevrier: It is just one page.


Gordon Campbell Chown: Has the hon. member permission to put the table on Hansard?


Edwin William Brunsden: I suggest the hon. member read the figures.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The table referred to above, follows:]
Non-toll traffic (1)
by Table 6	type	of vessel	Cornwall	CanalType of vessel No. of	Net	Gross	Cargotransits	tons	tons	tonsUpbound:	Cargo	49	69,304	89,134	138,090Tug and barge	130*	5,887	14,567	-Tanker	17	20,293	32,009	45,022Other craft	7	271	541	-Total-upbound	203	95,755	136,251	183,112Downbound:	Cargo	52	73,647	94,478	-Tug and barge	140*	7,608	16,933	-Tanker	17	20,293	32,009	-Other craft	7	75	80	-Total-downbound	216	101,623	143,500	-Total:	Cargo	101	142,951	183,612	138,090Tug and barge	270	13,495	31,500	-Tanker	34	40,586	64,018	45,022Other craft	14	346	621	-GRAND TOTAL	419	197,378	279.751	183,112Single units. (1) Toll-free Canal for all Traffic report of the	trafficSt.	Lawrence	seaway,	I960.
prepared by
St. Lawrence seaway authority and St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corp.


Lionel Chevrier: My purpose in putting these figures on the record is to indicate that in the old days the traffic on the St. Lawrence canal at Cornwall was tremendous and, in fact, was responsible in large part for the 

progress and development of that community, but as the railways came into being and as trucks and all the other methods of transportation advanced traffic gradually declined. From a peak of about 300,000 tons of traffic annually, reached after 1947, it went to 183,000 tons in 1960. So there is not a great deal of difference so far as that is concerned.
It was also stated that because of the facilities that were provided on the United States side of the line tremendous growth took place at Massena, N.Y. That statement is also inaccurate. There is no port at Massena but there are two industries at a place called Rooseveltown, New York, to the south almost diagonally opposite the wharf which is being built by the Department of Public Works. Reynolds Aluminum has established an industry there and General Motors have established a Chevrolet plant also. These developments have not taken place on account of port facilities because there are none there. They are due to railway and highway facilities and particularly due to the fact that the New York state power authority saw fit to allocate to the northern New York area, particularly Rooseveltown, a large block of power. That was unlike what was done by the Ontario hydro commission which decided to allocate no power to the immediate vicinity in the international section at Cornwall but rather decided to feed it all into the grid and thus transport it for the development of industry in southern and southwestern Ontario.
As the committee knows, what has been the difficulty in the community, which is being remedied by this and other actions to which I will refer in a moment, what was responsible for the boom was the fact that during the construction of the seaway no less than $800 million was spent within an area of five or ten miles of the city of Cornwall. When the construction work ceased there was of course a great letdown so far as public expenditure was concerned and business declined. However, if there has been a decline in the economy it has been due mostly to the closing of the three cotton industries to which I referred on another occasion although I will not go into that matter at this time.
I want to come back now to the wharf being built by the department. As the minister knows, this project was announced last year. I believe that in December of last year the mayor of the city of Cornwall announced that this would be done and from that time on all sorts of hopeful statements have appeared in the local press under headings such as "Seaway City Name a Reality at Last", "Perhaps City's Seaway Dream Wrapped in the Harbour", "Seaway About to Enter Period of Adjustment", "Seaway

Wharf May Mark Turning of the Tide". Editorials under headings of this type appeared in the Cornwall Standard-Freeholder over a period from December last year even up to May of this year.
In one editorial at least some surprise is expressed at the fact that these facilities will not be started until August of this year. When the minister replies, I should like him to give some indication of why there should be such a delay. The announcement was made by the mayor in December of last year. It was confirmed by the present mayor at a later date. I believe the minister himself made an announcement. There has been an item in the estimates on one occasion and I may be mistaken but I believe there was also an item in a supplementary estimate.
As set forth in an editorial in a recent issue of the Standard-Freeholder, the question which arises is why the work is not to begin until the month of August. I think it is well to bring to the attention of the minister and the department matters which I am sure have been brought to their attention already. I bring them to the minister's attention again because I have been requested to do so. I bring them to his attention particularly because of the work that is being done by the industrial development corporation. Without any hope of remuneration, they have purchased the facilities belonging to the Canada and the Dundas cotton mills as I have said, and they are actively soliciting industries. They have already succeeded in bringing to the area two industries and they hope to be able to have another one in the near future. They are convinced that this facility being established by the department will enhance tremendously the value of the premises which they have purchased.
I need hardly tell the minister that in order to encourage industry there should not only be rail and highway facilities but there must of necessity also be cheap water transportation facilities. Those who have been critical of the former administration should be reminded that a channel 27 feet in depth was built alongside the wharf and leading up to a structure in the dike of the power dam in order to provide for a deep-water canal on the Canadian side should the volume of traffic on the seaway warrant it at a later date. These people should be reminded that here is a channel that has permitted the Department of Public Works to build a wharf and I hope a shed also in due course.
I believe the department would not have thought for one moment of constructing these facilities had there not been a 27-foot depth of water in the immediate area. The fact that there is in Cornwall the headquarters
Supply-Public Works
building of the St. Lawrence seaway authority, which houses some 150 people, and the fact that the former administration took the decision to build two international bridges there, one to connect the United States shore with the Canadian shore over the south channel and another to connect Cornwall island and the city of Cornwall over the north channel, should be encouraging factors and should confirm the department in the view that the money to be spent here is money that will be well spent.
There is a great deal more that I think the department can do, and I hope the minister and his officials will continue to give consideration to further facilities as time goes on. However, there is one thing particularly which I have been requested to bring to the attention of the committee, the fact that construction under this program announced many months ago has not yet started. If the Department of Public Works will give this development the same attention and care that it gives to many of its other public projects, I am sure the city of Cornwall will thrive and benefit from this expenditure.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Mr. Chairman, I find in the book of estimates an item which reads as follows: "St. Hilaire retaining wall, $100,000". First, I wish to thank the minister and the Department of Public Works for their kind attention in solving this problem at St. Hilaire. I should like to remind the minister that sometimes after there has been publication in the newspapers of the fact that certain works are to be performed by his department, the work is not actually performed before the fiscal year is ended. This happened once in respect of St. Hilaire, and I hope that the minister will inform the appropriate officials-perhaps if the former member for Stormont would discuss his problems outside the chamber, I could continue my speech.
I was saying that two years ago there was supposed to be a retaining wall built in the vicinity of St. Hilaire at a cost of $75,000. Something happened and the work was not actually performed by the department before the end of the fiscal year. I understand that the amount has now been increased by $25,000, bringing it up to $100,000. I am going to take advantage of this opportunity, therefore, to thank the minister for increasing the amount. However, I should like to make sure that his officials, either in Montreal or in Ottawa, see to it that construction of this retaining wall is undertaken not later than July 15. I hope that I shall soon read in the newspapers that tenders have been called by the Department of Public Works for the construction of this protecting wall.

Supply-Public Works
I do not want to ask for too much for my own constituency. However, I have a few remarks to make in connection with the needs of some of the municipalities in my constituency which can be met by the Department of Public Works.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, I understand that in St. Hilaire the municipal council was planning to build a main sewer of some importance. This main sewer could be installed on the shores of the Richelieu river so that the pipes could lead to a sewage disposal plant. It might be advisable to build the retaining wall needed in the village of St. Hilaire at the same time as the main sewer the municipality proposes to install jointly with the municipality of Otterburn Park.
This retaining wall could be built by the federal government while the main sewer would be installed by the municipality, possibly as a joint operation. Of course, many details remain to be discussed. However, I ask the minister to intervene so that his departmental officials in Montreal meet with the St. Hilaire municipal authorities to discuss this project as soon as possible.
The above-mentioned retaining wall which is planned for this year extends over a section outside the village. That is justifiable because there are houses on this section of land that are inhabited all year round by country people around St. Hilaire.
It is extremely important that those properties be protected before those in the village, because the houses there are not near the river but some distance away from it. In fact, the provincial highway which is also the main street of St. Hilaire, runs between the shore and the houses; but nevertheless, the highway may possibly cave in. It is essential that the Department of Public Works take action without delay.
The federal government should avail itself of this opportunity to open negotiations with the municipality of St. Hilaire and undertake both projects simultaneously so as to avoid duplication and enable the municipality of St. Hilaire to build its main sewer as cheaply as possible.
It has been pointed out to me that in Otter-burn Park a wharf owned by the federal government is in need of repairs. I call the minister's attention to this matter and I ask that an investigation be made as soon as possible.


Since we are speaking of wharves, it might be advisable to repair the Chambly canal and its wharf pending the implementation of the Richelieu waterway project.
I should like now to refer to the Marieville post office. On page 461 of the main estimates, I note that an amount of $30,000 is provided to repair and extend the Marieville post office. Up to now, discussions have taken place between representatives of the federal Department of Public Works and those of the previous municipal council. Since then, there were both provincial and municipal elections. The municipal council has been substantially altered and I think negotiations would have to start from scratch to bring the new members up to date.
Following the provincial election, changes were made within the department of Public Works in Quebec City. Employees of the department were transferred from Montreal, amongst others Mr. Martineau, architect, who was responsible for the plans for an addition and repairs to the post office of Marieville. Someone from the department's Montreal office should get in touch with the new municipal council of Marieville so that an agreement could be reached. There is a problem, however; the property next to the post office belongs to the municipality.
The municipality is asking a prohibitive price for that property. A meeting should therefore be arranged between the representatives of the Department of Public Works and those of the municipality to convince the latter that the property which is needed for the construction of the addition should be sold to the federal government for a fair and reasonable price.
Mr. Chairman, I should also like to call the minister's attention to the fact that a pile of Fryer dam on Fryer island, between Richelieu and Chambly on the Richelieu, has been in need of repair for the past two years.
If I remember well, I was told by the Department of Public Works, two years ago, that those repairs were urgent. The people of that area are still waiting for news about that famous pile which, according to officials of the Department of Public Works, is in urgent need of repairs. That was two years ago; I wonder what certain officials of the department mean by urgent repairs.
Mr. Chairman, about two or three years ago, a retaining wall was built in Beloeil in accordance with a promise made by the former Liberal government. I honestly felt at that time that that project was less urgent

than the one in McMasterville. However, so as not to deprive the municipality of Beloeil of that retaining wall and the people of that community of the work they were going to have by the implementation of that project, I willingly agreed, without too much discussion, to let the officials of the department, whether they be from Montreal or Ottawa, make the mistake of thinking that the construction of a retaining wall was more urgent in Beloeil than in McMasterville.
Subsequent events proved that I was right. In fact, the following spring, McMasterville was the scene of a serious flood. The provincial highway which is also the main street in McMasterville was under more water than it had been for a long time. Fortunately, last year and this year, McMasterville was spared that calamity, but the danger is none the less there and, each spring, floods may occur.
In 1959-I have not time to read the letter from the deputy minister to that effect- departmental officials were suggesting that a retaining wall was less urgently needed at McMasterville than at Beloeil, even though the Richelieu channel used by the ships is nearer the shore at McMasterville than at Beloeil. Such an attitude was beyond my understanding and I never could figure out how an intelligent man could write such a letter, but it is actually on file and the decision left me no choice.
However the fact remains that such a retaining wall is most important for McMasterville. Let no one suggest, like the officials of the department did after the unfortunate decision taken by the St. Laurent government, that a retaining wall should be built only where damages have been done by navigation or by erosion resulting from navigation.
The Richelieu channel is located a few feet from the highway and surely the damages are due, if not entirely at least partly, to erosion, caused by navigation.
However the matter also concerns the provincial government. As I have said already, the provincial highway is at the same time the main street in McMasterville and it runs along the river. This highway will surely have to be widened.
This question of widening the highway was raised before last summer and then was the time for the provincial and federal governments to show co-operation in order that once
Supply-Public Works
the widening of the highway was completed the federal government might build an adequate retaining wall.
I met with the members of the municipal council of McMasterville and the provincial member to discuss this matter. And although the provincial member was a political friend, I put it quite plainly to the municipal authorities that the provincial government must first widen the highway before the federal government could build a retaining wall.
This view was approved by the provincial member and he was to submit the matter to the provincial minister of highways. I was given the indication at the time that things would be settled in such a way that this highway would be widened and the only thing left to do would be the building of the retaining wall.
Since the change of government in Quebec, I have been without news from him. I know that the provincial member is a man of goodwill. He once told me publicly before several witnesses that he was ready to use in our favour whatever influence he had with the provincial government or the minister of highways. I do not know whether he made any representations, but I hope that he is better at keeping his word than his leader and that we may witness an extremely warm cooperation between the provincial highway department authorities and the representatives of public works.
Mr. Chairman, I ask the Minister of Public Works to take this into consideration so that the federal government will at least take the initiative of discussing this problem with the representatives of the Quebec highway department.
I have said it in McMasterville, I told the municipal authorities and I repeat it here- the provincial government must first decide to widen that road. But, the federal government and the Department of Public Works more particularly must do their share and indicate that they are ready to build the retaining wall as soon as the highway has been widened. I hope there will be closer co-operation between the two governments so that the citizens of McMasterville will at last be treated with justice.
They have been kept waiting for several years. In fact, when I was elected as representative of Chambly-Rouville which in-

Supply-Public Works eludes McMasterville, I was told that the Liberal party had taken advantage of three or four election campaigns to promise a retaining wall.
I was in for collecting the hats as they say in French, to fulfil the promises made by my predecessors, but I am not going to back out. I hope I will be able to count not only on the co-operation of the minister, but also of his officials, low and high.
Mr. Chairman, I have another request to make concerning a retaining wall. I am referring to the famous retaining wall in Cham-bly, that is around the basin.
There is a magnificent basin in Chambly, but navigation is doing such considerable damage to the bank that if it should continue part of Main street and Church street will collapse, and the rectory and the church with it.
It would be interesting if the public works officials were to revise their judgment. I was told two or three years ago that erosion at that spot was not caused by navigation only but was also due to natural causes. If that is the case, it should be said clearly. The provincial government should be advised to assume its responsibilities. We should urge the minister of natural resources, the former minister of hydraulic resources, to take his responsibilities and to repair the damage caused by erosion.
I still think something might be done, pending a decision by the provincial government. The federal government might perhaps decide. Since damages are largely caused by navigation on Chambly canal, which flows into Chambly basin, about 100 feet from the shore, the federal government might consider the erosion there as its responsibility and build a retaining wall.
Let no one object that the federal government has no jurisdiction. Under section 91 of the constitution, the federal government has jurisdiction on navigation and must necessarily be held responsible for damages caused by navigation. But, even when erosion is not entirely due to navigation, it remains that subparagraph (c), paragraph 10 of section 92 is specific on that point and it empowers the federal government to undertake the construction of such retaining walls.
I should like to quote subparagraph (c), paragraph 10 of section 92 of the B.N.A. Act. Paragraph 10 provides that:


local works and undertakings other than such as are of the following classes.
are considered to be of a provincial nature, lying within provincial jurisdiction, and one of those categories is category (c) which reads as follows:
(c) Such works as, although wholly situated within the province, are before or after their execution declared by the parliament of Canada to he for the general advantage of Canada or for the advantage of two or more of the provinces.
I think that section may receive a wide enough interpretation to include the construction of retaining walls. Of course, if that section were to conflict with another power of the provincial government, we could not discuss the matter, because the provincial power has priority.
But there does not seem to be any objection, in the sphere of provincial jurisdiction, to the federal government undertaking such works. If the provincial government did object to the federal government undertaking such works, Mr. Chairman, we would have nothing more to say. However, I submit that the provincial government should shoulder its responsibilities and build itself that sustaining wall, which has become absolutely necessary.
Finally, so long as the provincial government will not undertake the construction of that retaining wall, and so long as the damages are caused substantially by navigation, a field coming under the jurisdiction of the federal government, and so long as the provincial government holds on to its attitude, the federal government may assume that responsibility and build retaining walls.
If I may, I would even make another suggestion. If there is fear of taking such a decision, if even hypothetical consequences are feared, it might be possible for the Department of Public Works to arrange with the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources that the latter build that retaining wall around Chambly basin in order to beautify the approaches to Chambly fort, which is located at the other extreme of that basin. We could then have at that place a well-built and well cared for fort, with a retaining wall around the basin limiting a park, a development which would be extremely attractive and interesting for tourists.
Since I have a few minutes left, Mr. Chairman, I should like to come back to another question dear to my heart. During the discussion on the post office estimates, I talked about the possibility for the government to

make rooms available to members in public buildings. I think I can resume that point on the first item of the estimates of the Department of Public Works, since those buildings seem to belong to that department.
The Postmaster General (Mr. Hamilton) cleverly dodged that issue in the house. Therefore, I should like to know whether the Minister of Public Works will commit himself and mention that problem.
That is a worth-while suggestion particularly when one considers that voters very often have to see their member, even though it is only to ask for information, because, after all, instead of preaching against patronage, when we could do some, we are satisfied with not doing any, while another government, another party which-


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: You have no right to say that.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Here in Ottawa, I think the situation is clear, there is no question of patronage, but, of course, the voters like to see their members even though it is only to voice complaints about some civil servants, and this is their natural right.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: I see that some members are giving me their approval, and if my hon. friends opposite would imitate them, everything would work more smoothly.
Voters are right when they go to see their member. They have a right to ask him for information, to ask for an appointment, even to criticize him and rake him over the coals. Therefore, it would be most important that the member have at his disposal, in a central part of his riding, an office comprised of one or two rooms, just a waiting room and an office, to receive his supporters, while a civil servant could be affected to the reception of communications from voters who would like to obtain appointments with their member of parliament.
Mr. Chairman, these requests are important, because the session keeps us here at least five and even six days a week over a six to eight month period.
It is of the utmost importance to have in the constituency a place where the electors can go when they wish to meet their representative and there should be someone, a civil servant, for instance during office hours, not necessarily at night, who would take their messages and deliver them to their member of parliament during the week end. Part of those public buildings could be used for that purpose.
Supply-Public Works
Let us take, for instance, the case of Marieville. It would be possible to reserve one or two rooms in the post office for that purpose. The post office officials could take the messages of the electors who want to communicate with their representative.
I know that is less urgent in my own constituency since my electors can easily reach me over the week end. But since we are in the house during the week, we need someone to take any messages.
As long as the members' indemnity is not increased, they will not be able to afford a full-time secretary.
Perhaps the Minister of Public Works could refer this question to the cabinet. If he would kindly and patiently read over the remarks I have made-perhaps a little vague but useful-I believe-I would be grateful to him.
I want to thank him in advance for his kind attention, and I hope departmental officials will never again pull the trick they once pulled on the people of St. Hilaire by dropping a vote for the construction of a retaining wall which was never built.
(Text):


Erhart Regier: Mr. Chairman, I do not this evening intend to complain about any municipal government or about either the Liberals or the Conservatives. I mean to recall to the minister's mind some rather disastrous floods that occurred in the city and in the district of Coquitlam over each of a long number of years, and I would like to especially recall to his mind the disastrous flood that occurred in the whole of the lower mainland of British Columbia back in 1948. This incidentally, was a flood that cost all levels of government many, many millions of dollars. As a result especially of this disastrous flood of 1948 there was established what was then known as the Fraser river basin board, now known as the Fraser river board. The responsibilities of the board have been to make an intensive survey of all phases of the river including even such matters as upstream power dams, and so on, as well as flood control.
As I understand it, as a result of a letter written by the diking commissioner at New Westminster, British Columbia, this Fraser river board presents its report to both the provincial and federal governments. I should like to read from its interim report labelled "Investigations into Measures for Flood Control in the Fraser river Basin" the following pertinent portions:

Supply-Public Works
The fourth alignment for a diversion is from the Pitt river near DeBoville slough-
I might say before continuing that there were investigations carried out in respect of many possible diversions for this river into the sea in order to prevent a repetition of the disaster of the 1948 flood. The report continues as follows:
-parallel to the main road, and along the hill foot to Port Moody. See route 4, plate 5.5.1-4. The length of this channel would be 29,800 feet with probably another 4,000 feet of channel to he dredged into deep water at Port Moody.
The area is not particularly useful as agricultural land. One main feeder road and two minor roads are crossed. This route also intersects the Coquitlam river.
A concrete lined rectangular channel, 200 feet wide with bed slope .0003, and bed level at Pitt river-16.0 geodetic was assumed for the study. The only control necessary would be at Port Moody to prevent the flow from Burrard inlet to Pitt river when the tide is high and the Fraser river is at a low stage.
Calculations of the daily discharge of this channel for the 31-day period, June 12 to July 12, 1950, were made. The total discharge of the channel for this period was compared to the runoff of the Fraser river at Hope for the same period. The comparison showed that the diversion channel could discharge 18.8 per cent of the Hope flow.
The lowering of water levels on the Fraser river, through the diversion of water from Pitt river to Burrard inlet, cannot be determined from the data presently available. To obtain the necessary data would require a long and extensive survey. The answer to the determination of the extent of stage reduction seems to lie in a model study.
I have been asked by a large number of organizations and individuals to appeal to the government to undertake this kind of a survey. I am not in a position to advocate the digging of a canal to connect the Pitt river to Burrard inlet. However, I do know that this is an ancient river bed of the Fraser, and it would appear only logical that, if this canal were dug, it would very easily alleviate the possibility of floods in the lower mainland, and especially in the district and city of Port Coquitlam.
Ever since a little publicity was given to this proposal, I have received a large number of letters which have indicated that this is not a new proposal, but that it was initially raised in the year 1910, and as late, as I have already indicated, as 1955. At that time an official board of this government recommended, or at least expressed its opinion, that there should be a long and extensive survey made.
All I intend to do this evening is to appeal to the government to express its willingness to vote a limited number of dollars, perhaps in the tens of thousands, which this long and extensive survey might require, because we cannot easily forget what the flood of 1948 cost-it was in the neighbourhood of $15 million. Nor can we forget the almost annual floods which we have had in the areas of

the Coquitlam river, which have run into tens of thousands of dollars each and every time they occurred. I have received a letter from a Mr. Cannell in which he endorses the idea of such an extensive survey. I have also received a letter from a clergyman, Reverend A. J. Griffin, of Trinity United Church, Port Coquitlam, which reads as follows:
Your enclosed letter was most interesting. All points to an exciting possibility.
A long range flood control plan is most urgent in our area.
Put me down in favour of this "canal" idea- I realize a lot of investigation has yet to be done, but as you say, the potential is fabulous.
I have also received a letter from a Mr. Gibson which refers in detail to this situation. The letter reads as follows:
I am quite interested in the proposal to dig a canal from the Pitt river to Burrard inlet. This canal if dug sure would be advantageous for the control of flood. I do not think it will be long before there will be floods in the valley, from what I saw during the last winter, if not corrected one way or the other. There seems to be quite a bit of dispute throughout the lower mainland as to who is responsible for flood control. If a canal were dug this would eliminate this uncertainty, would it not? The dikes are deteriorating and should have more maintenance than is being done at present.


David James Walker: Mr. Chairman, perhaps the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam would allow me to interrupt to ask a question. Is the canal which he is suggesting in aid of navigation or is it in connection with flood control?


Erhart Regier: I should like to answer the minister in this way. I am not advocating that this canal be dug but am pleading guilty to a lack of adequate information. However, I am asking that an adequate survey be made as to the feasibility of such a canal. I suggest if the canal were dug it could easily be a measure for flood control as well as an aid to navigation. The minister's department is very definitely involved because that department is the only department which would do the work if it were deemed advisable. I should like to be modest in this respect and say that I am not advocating this proposal but am pleading, with some knowledge of the important matters involved, that the government expend the money necessary to undertake such a survey.
The letter from Mr. Gibson continues as follows:
No one seems to want the responsibility of dike maintenance in normal times but, after flooding, when it is too late, someone decides something should be done.
In my experience the municipal government has always maintained that this was the responsibility of the federal government, while the federal government has always maintained it was the responsibility of the

provincial government. The provincial government maintains, of course, that this is the responsibility of either the municipal or federal government. I have been interested in this now for many long years. When the present Secretary of State for External Affairs was the minister of this department we had almost arrived at the conclusion at least to make an attempt to resolve this unending problem. This has been a problem to those people ever since 1910, when the late Mr. Kilmer, an eminent engineer, advocated that a canal be built.
Mr. Gibson goes on to say:
I understand that the pumping system should be modernized soon. This may cause considerable expense. Would this canal be a boon to logging operations on a sustained yield basis for a big part of Garibaldi park and open up the tourist and Vancouver holiday trade? There is no doubt about the commercial possibilities. This would be a help, too, in relieving the unemployment situation throughout the lower mainland.
I think this proposed canal would be a good election subject for the C.C.F. party-
I would recommend to the minister that if he adopted the proposal it might be a good election subject for his own supporter in my riding, and if he were willing to dig the canal I would be willing to give him full marks. I would not even ask him to invite me to the official opening of the proposed canal, I would be so happy at the project being completed.
I also have a letter from a leading Liberal of the city of Port Coquitlam, a Mr. Harry Purdy. This is a non-political letter. He wholly endorses the idea of the government investigating the possibilities, and being prepared to spend the limited amount of money necessary to make an adequate survey. He pays his compliments to a former Conservative opponent of mine, the highly respected alderman Jane Kilmer. It was her father who first proposed away back in 1910 that this canal be dug. I have a letter from a captain of a tow boat in the waters concerned; he is a grandson of this Mr. Kilmer of whom I am speaking.
I am not going to ask the government to dig the canal this year, nor next year. However, we do have an urgent problem of annual flooding, and for the life of us, all of us, regardless of whether we are Liberals, Conservatives, Social Crediters, members of the New party or of the C.C.F. party, we cannot, and have not been able to bind any level of government down to assuming responsibility. At the mouth of the Coquitlam river on the one side there is an Indian reserve which is under the jurisdiction of the federal government. On the other side there is Colony farm which is owned by the government of British Columbia and yet the river runs through the 90205-6-405
Supply-Public Works
district of Coquitlam and the city of Coquitlam. No one wants to assume any responsibility. The river was last cleaned out in 1919. It has not been used since that time for major transportation, and therefore the federal government says that since 1919 it has not been a navigable river and its responsibility has ended.
One of the letters I received reprimanded me a bit. The writer, a Mr. Cockerill by name, complained and suggested that I am overly ambitious, that I could not expect the federal government to dig the canal from the Pitt river to the head of Burrard inlet. He asked why I did not in the first instance plead with the federal government to divert the Coquitlam river into Burrard inlet and then a few years later I could ask them to complete the other mile and a half of the canal in order to connect the Pitt river and the Burrard inlet. I believe that proposal has much merit. At this time I am asking the minister in all earnestness not to be political and not to be hasty but to discuss this honestly with his engineers. I know there may be engineering interests, not in his department, and other interests that may be very much in opposition to this idea. However, I ask him to institute a survey, to spend the $30,000, $40,000 or even $100,000 necessary, because it may save the taxpayers of Canada many tens of millions of dollars in the years to come and also save the annual ridiculous cost of maintaining dikes that all of us know are inadequate, if ever exceptionally high waters recur.


Mr. McGrath:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to speak for a few minutes on the minister's estimates on a subject which I raised last year, namely the importance of the harbours and rivers division in his department to my province, with particular regard to the construction of breakwaters.
During the discussion of the minister's estimates last year I brought to his attention the necessity for the construction of a breakwater at Bell Island. As I pointed out to the minister, that part of my constituency has a very large and very important mining community with a population of approximately 14,000 and it is without harbour facilities.
When one considers the nature of transportation and its importance to this island community it is all the more important that we stop to think of the fact that this community is without adequate harbour facilities.
A few years ago a substantial public wharf and shed were constructed on Bell Island. The minister will recall that at that time he came to Newfoundland to officially open the structure. I was given to understand that

Supply-Public Works
this particular public wharf was designed in such a way as to make itself eventually complementary to a breakwater and thereby provide artificial harbour facilities; in other words a small boat basin.
The economic situation on Bell Island has deteriorated somewhat in the last few years. There is a serious unemployment problem and there have been suggestions from time to time that perhaps some of the answers to the economic difficulties facing this part of my constituency, and this very important Dosco operation, may be some incentives to those people on the island to carry on a shore fishery. Of course, in order to do this it is essential that adequate harbour facilities be provided. If the minister's department is prepared to give consideration to the construction of a breakwater at this place it will first and foremost provide harbour facilities. Second, but also important in this respect, is that it will provide adequate mooring facilities and adequate shelter for the operation of the ferry service which runs between Bell Island and the local mainland with its terminal at Portugal Cove.
Within the last year the federal government has provided new automobile-passenger ferry for this important service. This ferry is now in operation. Again, it seems to me that we were given to understand from time to time that the decision to provide a breakwater at this place was contingent on the new ferry going into service, in other words, in order to determine properly the correct location of such a breakwater with a view to providing the maximum protection for the boat. The new ferry has been in operation now for the last ten months. Again, I am not expressing an opinion of the department but it is the opinion of the local people in the area who are familiar with the tides and the prevailing winds that the necessity of a breakwater at this place has been proven beyond any doubt in order to provide adequate shelter for the ferry which has to moor at Bell Island when it is not in service providing and maintaining adequate communication with the local mainland. When the minister replies I hope he will be able to throw some light on what the plans of the department are in this regard.
The second point I wish to raise concerns a very important aspect of public works, one of the major public works projects currently being undertaken in this country. I refer to the development of St. John's harbour. The vote for this year, which I think will just about conclude the final phase of the development, is just under $5 million. The contract for the north shore phase of this development was let some time last winter. I cannot recall the exact date, but it seems to

me there has been considerable delay from the time the contract was let until the time work actually got under way. I understand that only now is construction beginning to start on this phase of the harbour development after a delay of three or four months.
I realize, of course, that part of the delay was caused by the quite extraordinary ice conditions that we experienced in that part of Canada this year. However, I feel that not all of the delay has been caused by ice conditions. I have not been successful in finding out from the contractor exactly when he does intend really to get under way with his portion of the development, and perhaps the minister may be able to give some indication when he replies.
I should also like to bring to the attention of the minister at this time my sense of disappointment at the fact that the vote for Newfoundland under construction of public buildings is substantially smaller compared with other provinces of similar size. It is substantially smaller than the vote for Nova Scotia and substantially smaller than the vote for the province of New Brunswick.
When one realizes that the department of Public Works, which is a very important department in Newfoundland, is housed in temporary wartime buildings, when one takes into account the fact that the operations of the Department of Fisheries in the province are also housed in temporary and inadequate facilities and that the operations of the Department of Labour and the unemployment insurance commission are also carried on in temporary wartime buildings, it seems to me that the minister should be impressed with the importance of providing proper facilities in the province for the public service of Canada.
I do not think it is right and fitting that departments of the federal government should be forced to operate under most inadequate conditions. It has a demoralizing effect on the staffs of these departments. They are usually working in cramped quarters and I think it would pay off in the long run if proper accommodation were provided. I hope that some attention will be paid in the consideration of the minister's estimates for the next fiscal year to providing another public building in the city of St. John's to house these very important departments. The Sir Humphrey Gilbert building, which houses the other departments of government to which I have not referred, is filled to capacity at the present time. In order to provide proper facilities for the three remaining departments, which in my opinion are the most important departments to the province, I believe that consideration should certainly be given in the estimates for the next fiscal

year to the inclusion of an item for another building in the city of St. John's to house these three departments.
There is one other matter to which I neglected to refer in my remarks with respect to Bell Island. This is an item that is not included in the estimates because it is something that arose subsequent to their preparation. I refer to the inclusion of a vote for the provision of adequate docking facilities at Bell Island and Portugal Cove to accommodate the new passenger-automobile ferry to which I have referred. I understand that plans are in the process of being prepared involving an approximate expenditure of $100,000. I was given to understand that the tender call would be ready several weeks ago. However, apparently the plans have not yet been completed.
We now find ourselves well on into the summer and the ferry John Guy, which is now operating on its summer schedule, is operating under a tremendous hazard by reason of having to use inadequate facilities which were prepared piecemeal for a much smaller type of vessel. With what is left of them now, which is not very much, I am afraid that unless something is done very soon we are going to have a tragedy on our hands because under extreme weather conditions the present ferry is going to find itself on the rocks. When the minister replies, I hope he will throw some light on this project with regard to what the delay is in getting it under way. I would hope that the tender call will be ready within a few days and that the minister will be able to tell us that this is so.
(Translation):


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 
David James Walker: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. Does the hon. gentleman appreciate the fact that this matter was raised by another hon. member in this house during the question period, and answered in full by me as reported at page 5576 of Hansard for May 30? At that time it was pointed out that 70 of the 74 members were French speaking, that the new chief himself was a very distinguished French Canadian gentleman, and as a matter of fact it now appears that the member who made this statement to the press was so ashamed of himself that he resigned from his position.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: If the minister wants to make a speech, he will have an opportunity to make it.

Supply-Public Works


David James Walker: It is all in Hansard.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: This is not a point of order. I have the floor, and I am going to keep it.
When the minister says that this matter has been raised, he is right. It has been raised, but it has not been answered in full. I have here Hansard for May 30, 1961.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, on May 30, 1961, the hon. member for Laval (Mr. Bourdages) put the following question:
Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works.
Could the minister indicate to the house whether the English language is imposed as the official language of communication between employees of his department at the Delorimier street office in Montreal and whether instructions to that effect have been issued by the new head of that office, Mr. G. R. Aubut, as reported in a story published in La Presse on May 25?
Mr. Chairman, I shall not put on the record the long statement which the minister made at that time, but I shall give a brief summary of his answer.
(Text):
Mr. Speaker, I did read the article, and can say there is no foundation at all to the report that Mr. Aubut, a distinguished French Canadian-
And so forth. Now, when the minister says there is no foundation, I am going to ask him some questions. Has he made an investigation? By whom was this investigation made? Was there a written report? We would like to know the contents of this report. Those are my questions, and the minister will have an opportunity to answer them.
I am going a little further than this article because I am not finished with the matter yet, even if the minister does not like it.


David James Walker: I like it. I am just pointing out how foolish you are.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: That is a very nice word for the minister to use.
(Translation):


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Chairman, let me read further:
But this is not the end of buffoonery. And this time it is more serious. The contempt of the French character of the province of Quebec is something of an institution within the federal Department of Public Works. The following development bears the fact.
A course on fire prevention was given recently to employees in charge of maintainance and heating of the department's building in the province. This course given by an English-speaking official from Ottawa was attended by 125 people, among whom were 115 French Canadians.
As they came out of the lecture hall, some 75 French-speaking employees admitted that they had not understood a word of the masterly explanations given by their English-speaking teacher-
No wonder that after such an incident things flare up somewhere.

Well, Mr. Chairman, in his answer of May 30, 1961, the minister also spoke about this incident, according to page 5576 of Hansard. I quote:
(Text):
The report concerning a lecture by an English speaking official of the Dominion fire commissioners' branch was correct in some respects, but sufficiently incomplete as to give an entirely wrong impression. A specialist on fire prevention in government buildings did go to Montreal to speak to representatives of all government departments there, including the fire wardens of all government buildings in the area. The office of the Dominion fire commissioner does not have a large staff, but its French speaking personnel includes an engineer who is completely bilingual. Unfortunately he was not available for this mission.
(Translation):
Well, Mr. Chairman, I should like at this point to leave the question of those unfortunate incidents and to tell the minister that, in the light of those facts, he will have to do something to which he is not used to- he will have to show a certain degree of humility. Let him agree that this was a mistake. We are not hard on him; we simply ask him to take appropriate action so that such mistakes do not occur any more.
Mr. Chairman, I will now go on to another topic.
I have here an article from the newspaper Le Devoir, dated June 8, 1961. I apologize to the minister, but the heading of this article is: "A blunder by Mr. Walker", and I quote:
The federal Minister of Public Works, Mr. Walker, should have thought twice before answering as he did Tuesday a question put by Mr. Murdo Martin. It is an advertisement published in a Paris daily by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and which appeared exclusively in English.
This unbelievable blunder was reported here on Monday in our column of Notes and Comments. The May 18 issue of Le Figaro published an advertisement headed "Canada-Town Planners". The Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which does not even mention that it also has a French name, wants to recruit town planners for its works in Ottawa and across the country. The advertisement explains that this Canadian government agency is responsible for housing and slum clearing programs, and goes on to list the qualifications required of applicants and the benefits they are offered. But the whole advertisement is in English.
Mr. Chairman, one must not be too critical, but at least we can ask the minister to see that such incidents are not repeated.
Mr. Chairman, I should now like to discuss another subject. On April 25, 1961, the hon. member for St. Henry (Mr. Lessard) asked the following question to the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Walker) as recorded on page 3965 of Hansard:
Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of Public Works. Le Devoir reports this morning a statement made yesterday by the minister to a delegation of unemployed to the effect that pick and shovel jobs are available for

the asking. As there are in my riding thousands of unemployed anxious to work can the minister tell us to whom they should apply and how many jobs are available?
The minister replied:
Mr. Speaker, I have not read the article referred to.
And Le Devoir, for April 25, 1961 published the following statement made to a delegation by the Minister of Public Works:
Mr. Walker immediately offered them a pick and shovel job. "Such jobs are available for the asking'', the minister said.
The day after that statement, when the minister was asked for an explanation, he did not even remember. So, I would just ask him in passing whether that statement was another of his jokes at the expense of Canada's unemployed?
Mr. Chairman, may I now say a word on the item concerning the trans-Canada highway. As the hon. member for Levis (Mr. Bour-get) so eloquently recalled this morning, we are now beginning to realize, through hindsight, that negative autonomy has cost us millions of dollars. I am very pleased to note that this year, an item has been included to cover the cost of the trans-Canada highway, something which will be of great benefit to the province of Quebec.
I do hope that when we reach that item, the hon. members who in 1958 opposed all joint programs will be there to support this item. Even if they have been slow to see the light, we are very pleased. We have been so successful in converting them that they are now blessing what they burned not so long ago.


Paul Raymond Martineau: What a Pecksniff.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Now, Mr. Chairman-


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Before going on to another subject, would the hon. member allow me a question?
The hon. member asked how some members of the house can reconcile their attitude with their former stand against joint projects. I would ask the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont (Mr. Deschatelets) how he can reconcile the attitude of the government of the province of Quebec which, on the one hand, denounced joint programs in July and on the other hand, has accepted and signed the agreement on the trans-Canada highway.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Chairman, that is a very easy question. It is a matter of public record that the Quebec provincial government has never spoken against joint projects. The hon. member for Chambly-Rouville (Mr. Johnson) is mistaken. What he is thinking about is the opposition shown by one of his leaders, Mr. Talbot.
Supply-Public Works


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Not at all. I am speaking of the opposition made by the Quebec premier, Mr. Lesage.


Maurice Bourget: If my hon. colleague will allow, I will reply to the hon. member because I have followed quite closely-


Jacques Flynn: Order. Perhaps the hon. member should let the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont reply because since we have to follow the established order of members who wish to speak, he might have to keep the floor longer than he thinks.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Chairman, I should now like to say a few words on the question of slums.
Allow me to read an article which was published in the Toronto Daily Star of June 3, 1961. Everybody knows how independent that newspaper is.
(Text):


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Don't make me laugh. (Translation) :


Some hon. Members:: He does not understand.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: That article is entitled: (Text):
Ottawa should lead.
Scoldings do not clear any slums, not even when the scoldings come from Canada's public works minister himself.
In Halifax this week, Mr. David Walker complained that Canadian municipalities were "not making nearly enough progress" in getting rid of slums and halting the spread of blight. He said that Ottawa offered "generous assistance" to the municipalities for these purposes, but the municipalities weren't making full use of it-
But the municipalities know from experience- for example, Toronto with Moss park-that being offered this kind of assistance is one thing; actually getting it is another.
The article concludes as follows:
The trouble is not just in one quarter, but all along the federal-provincial-municipal line-too little in the way of leadership; too much in the way of governmental and intergovernmental complexities.
As for leadership, it should come mainly from Ottawa, which is the main source of money and authority in this field. Rather than rail at the municipalities, let Mr. Walker rally them to the cause of self-improvement.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, I shall now conclude my remarks. I will certainly have some questions to ask when we come to the items of particular interest to me.
I trust that the minister will give back to this department which is so important the magnitude it had in previous years. In my opinion, this department has become the orphan of the government. When he succeeds

Supply-Public Works
in convincing his colleagues, it will be easier for us to put up with the arrogant replies he gives us from time to time.


Maurice Bourget: Mr. Chairman, allow me now to answer the question of the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville (Mr. Johnson) to the effect that the Quebec premier has spoken against joint projects.
I challenge the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville to quote a statement from a Quebec minister, not only the premier but any Quebec minister, opposing joint projects. I must tell him what the Quebec premier said in a speech delivered in the provincial legislature during the budget debate. Besides, he made this suggestion right here when he attended the last federal-provincial conference on fiscal matters. He said that he wanted to do away with joint projects and replace them with unconditional payments, by extending the fields of taxation reserved to the provinces. The hon. member for Chambly-Rouville must know that in this field, the province of Quebec has received absolutely nothing that is the answer I wanted to give the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville. Once again, I challenge him to quote words, not only from the premier but also from any Quebec minister. Besides, the thing is clear. If the province of Quebec had not wanted to take part in this joint project, it would not have signed the agreement on October 27 and 28, 1960.


Mr. Denis:: Anyone can see that.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: I put a question to the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont and willingly the hon. member for Levis walked into the trap I had set for my hon. friend from Maisonneuve-Rosemont. The hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont got around the difficulty not by quoting Mr. Lesage, nor by denying my statement concerning Mr. Lesage, but by quoting Mr. Talbot. Mr. Talbot has not changed his attitude. The hon. member for Levis cannot deny that Mr. Lesage took a position as regards joint projects and then, going against the attitude he had taken at the dominion-provincial fiscal conference, he allowed an agreement to be signed between the Minister of Public Works and his minister of highways for the trans-Canada highway.
Moreover, as the hon. member for Levis is aware, Mr. Lesage stated at the dominion-provincial conference in June or July 1960, that the time had come for the province of Quebec to abandon joint projects, because of
[Mr. Deschatelets.l
their conditional features, and that these matters should come back to the province. He went further, he said social security legislation should be brought back under provincial jurisdiction. Neither the hon. member for Levis, nor the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont, nor any one of their friends in the opposition can deny it.
Concerning the trans-Canada highway, can the hon. member deny that Mr. Lesage took a contradictory stand when, in July 1960, he denounced the joint plans by pointing out that they were an infringement of provincial jurisdiction, while, on the other hand, he had his minister of highways sign the agreement? If the hon. member can deny that, he will go against the texts. I did not have the documents a while ago and that is why I put the question to the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont.
It is six of one and a half dozen of the other.
If Mr. Lesage wants the federal government to withdraw from all joint programs and let the provincial government occupy the whole field of taxation, he only has flatly to turn down any joint program and to require the federal government to let the province have free rein over the whole field of taxation. That is, if Mr. Lesage is a logical man. There is no reason why he should have signed an agreement with the public works department. That is exactly what our friends opposite do not understand when they refer to the trans-Canada highway and other joint undertakings. They refuse to make allowance for circumstances such as they were when the Quebec government refused those joint undertakings.
The Quebec government was then waging a fiscal war with the federal government. That was the period of the "believe-or-die" policy of the federal government and the provincial government would not give in to such a policy. I say once again that such was the policy of the federal government.
Now that a Conservative government is in power, it has a better understanding of the situation and it is ready to discuss with Quebec and even to give it back its large share. The government is ready to let the premier of Quebec accept the joint undertakings freely.
Now that our party is in power, it is possible to discuss intelligently with provincial authorities, provided that the provincial government be in earnest.
It is not up to us, the federal members, to dictate to Mr. Lesage what he has to do.

If Mr. Lesage chose to sign that agreement, we morally have no right to refuse voting those items because the agreement was signed.
If Mr. Lesage had been consistent, he would have refused to sign the agreement and would then have explained his position, and would have been right to ask for a larger slice of the tax money.
When the Liberal party was in office, and surpluses were accumulating, federal M.P.s were refusing to restore the taxation sources belonging to the provincial government.
That is why the province for its part would not enter the joint schemes and agreements with the federal government, because it rightly contended that the federal government was using subterfuge to avoid restoring tax fields to the provincial government.
The federal level was trying to invade the field of provincial jurisdiction by refusing to restore to the provinces their sources of taxation.
We are now faced with a situation of fact which we have to respect. We must abide by the commitments of our predecessors.
Now that we have deficits, we cannot for all that overlook our commitments.
If Mr. Lesage wants the federal government to restore to him the sources of taxation, he only has to refuse the federal subsidies. Then we will see whether he is a man to be taken seriously or a joker.


Maurice Bourget: Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, I am not a lawyer. Being an engineer, I am not in the habit of wrapping my arguments in long sentences. Furthermore, I have no business defending the earnestness of the Quebec premier.


Mr. Parizeau:: The tax fiend.


Maurice Bourget: On June 22 last, the province of Quebec, in spite of all the organization and money of the Union Nationale, expressed its will.
I do not wish to prolong the debate any further on that matter. However, I shall say a word about joint loans.
The hon. member for Chambly-Rouville (Mr. Johnson) is a lawyer. He has the knack of wrapping his arguments in long-winded sentences. But he did not quote one word- and I challenge him to do so-of the Quebec premier denouncing those agreements on joint programs.
On the contrary, he made suggestions at the dominion-provincial conference.
Mr. Chairman, unless words mean nothing, there is a marked difference-and I hope my friend from Chambly-Rouville understands
Supply-Public Works
French-between making a suggestion and denouncing something.
As for fiscal agreements, we shall have the opportunity of coming back to that later. I repeat to the hon. member, one of those who, during the last federal election in the province of Quebec, said that we were strangling the provinces, that we have obtained nothing from the Conservative government, absolutely nothing, while other provinces were getting $1, $3, and even $8 per capita.
In the joint plans, nothing was changed, not even a comma, especially in regard to regulations concerning the agreements about the construction of the trans-Canada highway.
And you, honourable members, who denounced them, you, great patriots-


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Do quote our words.


Maurice Bourget: To quote all you have said, we would have to read for six days and six nights.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Go ahead, quote.


Maurice Bourget: You deny all you ever said in the past.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Not so loud, you might choke.


Maurice Bourget: You do not have the courage of standing up to repeat in this house what you said in the province of Quebec during the 1957 and 1958 election campaigns.


Jacques Flynn: Order.
I think this is no time to discuss the last provincial or federal election campaigns.
I urge the hon. member for Levis to go on with his remarks without straying too far from the trans-Canada highway program. Otherwise, we would run the risk of taking the wrong road.


Maurice Bourget: I refuse to follow the member for Chambly-Rouville.
I do not want to overtax the patience of the committee. However, I want to repeat this to the member for Chambly-Rouville: find me one statement of the premier of the province of Quebec in which he denounces the joint program. Ask your colleagues to try and find any.
Read over the speech of the premier of Quebec, and especially your own. Your friends in the province of Quebec, all of you who have supported Mr. Duplessis, have denounced that program.
Mr. Chairman, I immediately come back to the subject under discussion. But let gentlemen opposite tell the truth not only in the province of Quebec but in this house also.

Supply-Public Works


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: We always tell the truth.


Maurice Bourget: Never.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: You were sitting for 22 years, but we have been rising in this house ever since we have come to office.


Maurice Bourget: Yes, you are one of those who take the floor and repudiate what they stated in the province of Quebec in 1957 and 1958.


Jacques Flynn: Order, order.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: I would say that one hit a sore spot, gentlemen, particularly in the case of the hon- member for St. Denis (Mr. Denis), who is trying to get on his feet.


Maurice Bourget: It is nothing like the Salvas inquiry.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: To cool down the hon. members, I would refer to page 29 of the report of the proceedings of the 1960 fiscal conference held in Ottawa on July 25, 26 and 27.
Mr. Lesage says:
In Quebec, as in other places, our provincial development imposes on us and on our municipalities increasingly heavy demands. We are acting urgently to make proper provision for education-
May I say, in brackets, that this is just boasting-
-roads and many other services which are our constitutional responsibility.
Now listen to this-the hon. member for Levis should listen to this:
The determination of the government of Quebec is that those responsibilities should be discharged through harmonious and equitable exercise of the interdependent rights that belong to each government in Canada. That purpose, which animates the government of Quebec in coming to this conference, must, I believe, be our common purpose in Canada. That fundamentally, is why we are all here.
The premier then spoke about sovereignty and interdependence.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Where do you see that?


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: On page 31, the prime minister of the province of Quebec says-


Maurice Bourget: Go on.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Here it is:
To sum it up, the government of the province of Quebec means fully to exercise its sovereignty in the fields under its jurisdiction without, however, ignoring that all governments in this country are unavoidably interdependent.


Azellus Denis: Hear, hear.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: The premier further says-


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: You might have waited till tomorrow to find it.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Its coming now.


Maurice Bourget: That is the wrong book you have there, it is the second edition.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: No, no.


Maurice Bourget: It is nowhere to be found.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: The premier said further:
Neither are we without realizing that this federal government should also face serious responsibilities implying huge disbursements. We are well aware that in the last instance, money can only come from one source: from the taxpayer who has already to carry a tremendous tax load-


An hon. Member:: Hear, hear.


Georges-J. Valade: That is why Mr. Lesage increased taxes.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: I continue the quotation:
-Taking all these circumstances into account and considering the constitutional fact that direct taxation is a joint domain-and I am quite as magnanimous as Mr. Frost-belonging to both spheres of government, but the only one which may be used by the provinces, we think that taxation rates which are exclusively in the provincial field should be increased to at least 25 per cent of the present federal income tax, both on personal and corporation income.


Maurice Bourget: Very well.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Go on.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Now Mr. Lesage asks that the sources of taxation be supported by the provinces.


Maurice Bourget: Go on.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Give me time.


Azellus Denis: The remnants of the Union Nationale.


Maurice Bourget: It is so hard to find when it does not exist.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Why do you not prepare a brief for tomorrow.


Jacques Flynn: Perhaps the hon. member would let another member have the floor in the meantime, because I-


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Mr. Chairman, after all, the hon. member has a right to know-I do not mind the chairman making easy jokes, but-


Maurice Bourget: Very funny.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: The member for Levis (Mr. Bourget) has asked me to give the quotation. Here it is on page 27:
The federal government should withdraw from these fields to the extent that this is necessary to allow each province to get a fair share, namely 50 per cent of the taxable productivity of the said

personal and corporation income tax fields. This adjustment could be made progressively year by year over a five year period.
Exactly the suggestion which the Prime Minister of Canada has implemented.


Maurice Bourget: Come on, you are a better lawyer than that.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Let me find the text, I will quote it for you.


Maurice Bourget: Are you so sure of finding it? Of course we are in no hurry.


Mr. Tardif:: Hear, hear.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: I will find the quotation and will send it over to you.


Azellus Denis: Why not look on the cover? Look on the cover.


Some hon. Members:: Carried! Carried!


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: 1 will find the quotation and will send it over to you. Go ahead and laugh, but you know quite well that this question exists and was even published in the newspapers. I cannot find it at the moment, but I will send it over to the hon. member for Levis when another opportunity comes up. I rose immediately because I did not want to hold up the proceedings and the minister wanted to speak. I will give him the time, but the hon. member for Levis knows quite well that the quotation exists.


Maurice Bourget: Oh no.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: I will find it and will read it to you.


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville has been talking through his hat. He votes these amounts every year while pretending to be against them.
The trans-Canada highway is under construction from the Atlantic to the Pacific, but there is a gap in the province of Quebec. That province with the taxes paid by its people is paying part of the cost for other provinces. Quebec does not have the advantage of any federal subsidy because it does not have even a single mile of that highway under construction. One can only conclude that the people of the province of Quebec have been taken in by the government then in office. Some were saying then "Duplessis is giving to his province and Ottawa to foreigners", and they are doing exactly the same with this difference that the province of Quebec is now taking all it can get from Ottawa. It is not a question of winning an election on mines but of giving the people of Quebec their just share of the taxes they pay to Ottawa.
The statement made by the premier of the province of Quebec indicates that he 90205-6-406
Supply-Public Works
would like this joint program to be dropped and that another formula be arrived at. But in the hope of receiving all the millions of dollars which we lost during some years through the fault of the Union Nationale, the present Quebec Liberal government has accepted everything, will accept everything.
You are the ones who do not want Ottawa to give to the provinces under joint programs. At long last, for the first time in some 15 years, the province of Quebec is part of Canada; it is part of confederation. If ever during the next election mention is made of mines like those which have misled for years the people of the province of Quebec -well we had enough of that. There are only a few supporters of the Union Nationale left and they are here in Ottawa, until the next election. They have had the jitters ever since the last provincial election; this is the swan song.
I sympathize with their statements.
If Mr. Duplessis was giving to his province and Ottawa to foreigners, what are you doing for the province of Quebec, you who have doubled everything you blamed us for in the past.


Mr. Bourbonnais:: Would the hon. member allow me a question, Mr. Chairman? He said: "For the first time the province of Quebec is part of confederation". What does he think of all the veterans, of our Canadians of the province of Quebec who sacrificed their fives during the last war?


Alexis Pierre Caron: They were not supporters of the Union Nationale.


Azellus Denis: I did not understand the hon. member's question. I suppose he was visiting his canal. Would the hon. member repeat his question so that I could try to answer if possible.


Marcel Bourbonnais: The hon. member for St. Denis said a moment ago that for the first time in the history of confederation, the province of Quebec was part of confederation. I ask him what he thinks of the people from Quebec who sacrificed their lives in two wars?


Azellus Denis: The hon. member is wrong. I told him that when the Union Nationale was in power in the province of Quebec, we were not part of the rest of the country, but that since the taking over by the Lesage government we are Canadian citizens and we are proud of it. In other words, we are not savages. We accept the legislation introduced by the present federal government, which is a Conservative government.

Supply-Public Works


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: I shall continue the quotation of the text I started to read before the hon. member for St. Denis took the floor. I just found it. It has to do with the joint programs and it is found at page 35 of the report of the proceedings of the fiscal federal-provincial conference held on July 25, 26 and 27, 1960. Mr. Lesage said in his brief:
Experience shows that often those joint programs do not allow the provinces to use their own revenues as they see fit and to sufficiently take into account local conditions.
And further on:
In addition, they also bring up administrative problems resulting in a loss of efficiency or duplication and higher costs. The provinces must have a special staff to report to Ottawa about the execution of those programs and the government in turn must hire officials to see to it that the conditions laid down by Ottawa are complied with by the provinces.
We feel that such a situation has become undesirable. The present joint programs have had a stimulating effect upon the economic and social development of the country; in several cases, they have replaced the provincial initiative. Those programs are now well enough on the way at the provincial level so that the federal government could put an end to its participation and withdraw from those fields.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: The federal government
should be willing to accept that request.


Maurice Bourget: Very well, that is exactly what I said.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Well, gentlemen from the Liberal party, you have just commended a brief submitted by Mr. Lesage, in the same terms, and containing the same mistakes in French that would have made Mr. Duplessis. What difference is there between Mr. Duplessis' stand and this stand taken by Mr. Lesage, who criticizes, who claims that experience shows that these joint programs do not allow the provinces to use their own income as they would like to, and to have due consideration for local conditions?
If Mr. Lesage held this opinion, why has he adhered to this scheme? And if Mr. Lesage has adhered to this scheme and, if, as you claim, gentlemen from the Liberal party, the people of the province of Quebec cannot afford to lose this money, which Mr. Lesage has accepted, then why do you ask us to refuse to vote for it?
You are being most illogical. You are nothing else but petty political followers, the followers of Mr. Lesage, your branch manager who is getting short of money and wishes the federal government to come in and foot the bill of his electoral promises. That is your

attitude, gentlemen of the Liberal party. If you want a fight, you will get it.


Maurice Bourget: We relish that.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: You are saying that on the one hand Mr. Lesage is right in signing these agreements and on the other hand that we would be wrong in supporting them. Where do you stand? What do you want? Are you for or against?


Maurice Bourget: Do you want to know?


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Do you want Mr. Lesage to take the logical attitude he adopted at the tax conference or do you want him to sign agreements? Do you want Mr. Lesage to come to Ottawa begging the federal government or making counter-propositions still favourable to the Quebec cause or do you want him to adopt the attitude of his predecessors who came and settled, for example, the university grants matter in a fashion compatible with their pride and without abandoning any provincial jurisdiction? Those people then discussed with the federal government.
The federal government, the Minister of Public Works is ready to discuss conditions, but Mr. Lesage did not want to discuss. He needed $10, he wanted $10 unconditionally without any discussion, without seeking to ascertain whether in good logic the experience would show that joint undertakings often do not allow the provinces to dispose of their own revenues according to their wishes and according to local conditions.
Mr. Lesage did not take that into consideration when he came to sign the joint agreements. He demanded nothing, he simply said: Gentlemen, I sign the agreement and I accept your conditions.
Can you blame the federal government? Logically, can you blame the federal members for approving such a thing, since it is Mr. Lesage who asked for it?
He should be logical. He should say once and for all what he wants. He may refuse, if he wants to, but then he should not blame his predecessors for their past refusals. Be logical, gentlemen of the Liberal party, take one or the other stand but take it in a responsible way.
In another line of thought, since we are now discussing joint programs, I think the Department of Public Works must, to some extent, supervise, on behalf of the government of Canada, works to be done on the Quebec section of the trans-Canada highway that is to be built. It is also its duty to supervise

the implementation of any agreement concerning the construction of a road to resources.


Azellus Denis: No commission on white lines.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: So, Mr. Chairman, according to an agreement signed between the federal government and the Quebec government last fall, the federal government contributes, jointly with the Quebec government, to the construction of a road to the Mattagami mine. Now, Mr. Chairman, section 5 of that agreement provides:
(Text):
Canada and Quebec mutually covenant and agree as follows:
(1) No member of the House of Commons shall be admitted to any share or part of any contract, agreement or commission with respect to the project, or to any benefit to arise therefrom.
(Translation):
I wonder how a member of this parliament who has got into the habit of looking for the mote in his brother's eye and not seeing the beam in his own, like the member for Ville-neuve (Mr. Dumas), can explain that, as a land surveyor, he is collecting fees from the provincial government to survey the road leading to the Mattagami mine.
I refer to what the hon. member for Ville-neuve, who is unfortunately away, had to say. I do not like to attack him while he is away

he was here all afternoon-but since you want to bring up those matters, we will talk about them. I am sorry the hon. member is not here-


Jacques Flynn: If I correctly understood the remarks of the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville, he was talking about a contract between the central government and the government of the province of Quebec, but I did not understand whether it was about the trans-Canada highway or a public works contract-


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: That is right, Mr. Chairman.


Jacques Flynn: One in which the Department of Public Works is involved?


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Yes, Mr. Chairman, because according to the agreement entered into, the Department of Public Works must supervise the work on behalf of the federal government which is a party to the contract. As a matter of fact, even though agreements about the access roads were between the provincial governments and the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, they come under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works.
And just to show that those people who are talking about kickbacks are carrying on patronage in Quebec with federal funds- 90205-6-406i
Supply-Public Works


Maurice Bourget: Would the hon. member allow me a question?


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Do you want to ask me a question or to raise a point of order?


Maurice Bourget: No, I just want to ask a question.
Is the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville talking about an access road to mines?


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Yes, the Mattagami road.


Maurice Bourget: In that case, Mr. Chairman, I would ask you to call the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville to order, because the Department of Public Works has nothing to do with the access roads to mines, and the hon. member should know that those roads come under the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources.
Now, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member made a rather serious charge against the hon. member for Villeneuve.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: One moment, Mr. Chairman, we shall dispose of the point of order first.


Jacques Flynn: Order. The point of order has to do with the relevancy of the discussion on the estimates of the public works department. The hon. member for Levis (Mr. Bourget) seems to think that this contract is one that comes under the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. If that is the case, of course, it would be irregular to start a discussion on that contract.
On the other hand, the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville (Mr. Johnson) seems to suggest that the Department of Public Works has something to do with this matter.


Maurice Bourget: The Department of Public Works has nothing to do with it and the minister can confirm that.
(Text):


Jacques Flynn: Possibly the minister can enlighten the committee as to any responsibility of his department with respect to the contract to which the hon. member has alluded.


David James Walker: I have not been following the argument. I have no idea what it is about. What was the name of the road?


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Mattagami.


David James Walker: That is a road to resources. It is true that it is being paid for jointly by the province of Quebec and the federal government. So far as the administration of the building of the road is concerned, the Department of Public Works is in charge of that.


Maurice Bourget: No.


David James Walker: Yes. We are in charge of the administration of it. However, the amount

Supply

Public Works
paid by the federal government is charged to the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. We do a great deal of work for that department. They look to us as the responsible party to see that the proper people are paid on behalf of the federal government, that the road is surveyed and constructed properly, that the contracts are let properly and that everything is in order. We have a very important and almost overwhelming part in that regard, although the cost is charged to the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources.


Maurice Bourget: On the point of order, Mr. Chairman, can the minister tell the committee honestly-he has the deputy minister before him who knows about the matter if the minister does not-that the Department of Public Works has anything to do in any way, shape or form with roads to resources. I am asking the minister to tell us precisely and he can be informed by the deputy minister now.


An hon. Member:: He just told you.


Maurice Bourget: No, he tried to mix up the
whole situation. That is what he did. I understand French and English, you know.


David James Walker: In other words, the hon. member for Levis does not want me to speak French?


Maurice Bourget: Go ahead, French or English.


David James Walker: I can assure my hon. friend that I have consulted with the deputy, and I will repeat what I have said. We have everything to do so far as the duties of the federal government are concerned in connection with the building of roads to natural resources. The only thing we do not do is to sign the contract and pay the share of the federal government. It is just the same as with penitentiaries. The deputy points out to me that the trans-Canada highway is the best example of our participation, but in that case we also pay for it.
The hon. member for Levis may shake his head but it is four years since he had any part in the government of Canada and it may be 18 years more before he has again. He may shake his head but I am telling him the facts. It is not necessary for him to say to me, "Honestly now, Mr. Minister, will you tell us?" I am sorry that I have to disagree with the conception of the hon. member. Whom are you protecting tonight?


Maurice Bourget: Again I ask the question: Can the minister point to any item in these estimates that covers roads to resources? I am asking the minister, with the help of the deputy minister and all the officials who are around him and in the gallery, to tell me

here in the house if the Department of Public Works has something to do with this matter. The minister has said that the government of Canada has something to do with it. Roads to resources are under the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources who is in his seat. He knows that roads to resources are under his jurisdiction. Is that right?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: These are not my estimates and I have not been participating in the discussion throughout the day. However, I do understand that some use is made of the staff of the Department of Public Works in this regard and that there is an involvement in that connection.
(Translation):


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Mr. Chairman, I repeat that I was thinking of the statement of the Minister of Public Works to the effect that his department has something to do with it, and it was with regard to this that the point of order was raised.


Jacques Flynn: Order. In the document which the hon. member for Chambly-Rou-ville holds in his hand, if there is a clause which may establish a responsibility on the part of the Minister of Public Works with regard to contracts which may be awarded under that convention, I shall ask him to read out this text. However, if the responsibility of the Department of Public Works only extends to supervising from a physical point of view or with regard to the carrying out of work, I believe that this is not the right time to deal with the matter.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Mr. Chairman, the estimates of the Minister of Public Works contain various items dealing with specific objects. But when more general matters are involved, and we are discussing the administration vote the debate on various subjects directly or indirectly related to a department has to take place, if I understand the rules correctly, when the first item is discussed, and it is at that stage, to my mind, that I may speak on this issue, as it is not an item specifically relevant to the Department of Public Works but will probably be voted under some legislation which may be administered by another department. Now, I wonder at what point I may discuss this item, when for the supervision and the carrying out of that work the Department of Public Works is spending-


Jacques Flynn: Order. I asked the hon. member whether he had a text to read, because there is no doubt that expenses with regard to the roads to resources program are under the jurisdiction of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, and those items were voted when the estimates

of that department were discussed. When the hon. member says that under the first item of a department we may discuss anything that concerns the department, I agree. However, if the Department of Public Works is responsible for letting the contracts which come under the contract and is only responsible for the technical carrying out of the work, I think the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville will agree with me that it is not in order to discuss such matters under the estimates of the Department of Public Works.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: So, Mr. Chairman, I will not be allowed to discuss this on the estimates of the Department of Public Works, or to expose the underhand work of the hon. member for Villeneuve with the Lesage government; I will have to wait till next year, when the estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources are taken up, to raise the matter again.


Maurice Bourget: Mr. Chairman, I think you will allow me to take the defence of one of my colleagues who is forcibly absent from the house owing to illness. I find it odd that the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville has taken advantage of his absence to lay a completely false charge.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: He was here a few minutes ago.


Maurice Bourget: I shall prove to him, if the hon. member will just keep quiet and listen, I shall prove to him-


Jacques Flynn: Order. I have no objection to the hon. member speaking now. However, if he intends to show that the allegations made by the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville are not true, he will then be continuing the discussion and it will be impossible for me to prevent the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville from replying. If the hon. member for Levis insists on pursuing that course and if the committee is agreeable, I have no objection, but if he does, I think he is opening the door to a full debate on all the facts.


Maurice Bourget: Mr. Chairman, with your permission, my colleague's argument is very simple.
(Text) :
I am going to speak in English. This is the same as the trans-Canada highway. The minister will agree with me that, so far as the plans and surveys of the roads are concerned, the federal government does not have to pay a cent, is that right?


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Right.
Supply-Public Works


Maurice Bourget: Then, why do you accuse the hon. member for Villeneuve of getting money from the federal government when the federal government has not participated in the cost of the surveys or plans for the road? I am asking the Minister of Public Works if I am right or wrong in that. Does the federal government have to pay a cent for the preparation of the plans or surveys in connection with the route of the trans-Canada highway?


David James Walker: We do not pay for the land acquisition, but we do pay for the engineering survey of the route.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


David James Walker: We are responsible also for every cent that is spent. We have to approve of all the bills. Does the hon. member for Levis refer to the survey bills? We are responsible for the passing of the survey bills, the engineering surveys.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: May I speak to the point of order? Would the minister dare to say that, in so far as the roads to resources are concerned, the provinces do not make the surveys and pay for them? Do the provinces then not go to the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources with the proposal that they want accepted by the department? Does this not show that nothing whatever is coming from the federal government in so far as the location of the road is concerned and anything else except the construction of the road?


David James Walker: The answer to that, as I understand it, is that everything has to be approved in advance by the Department of Public Works on behalf of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, just as we do for so many other departments. We are increasing the scope of our activities. What is this all about, by the way?


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: The question is this.


David James Walker: I have heard your question and I have answered it.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: The question is this: Is not the province committed to surveying the road, preparing the plans and submitting them to the department? They have to pay for the preparation of the survey themselves?


David James Walker: It is the same procedure as that relating to the trans-Canada highway. The province pays for it, proves by vouchers what it is, and we check all the bills. The federal government pays its share and it is charged to the department of northern affairs.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: No, no.


David James Walker: If you know, don't bother asking questions.

Supply-Public Works Mr. Habel: I do know because I was discussing the whole matter with the minister of highways for Ontario, and he told me they had to pay for the survey themselves.
(Translation):


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Mr. Chairman, since the hon. member for Levis has given up his point of order, I think I could-


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: We shall give you enough rope to hang. Go on.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: -continue my remarks. All I want to say is that hon. members across the floor helped me to prove my point. They got the answers they wanted from the minister. The federal government pays its share of the Mattagami mine road. The provincial government awards a contract to a federal Liberal member. The provincial government avails itself of the provisions of this contract to do some day labour, to make use of patronage in the province of Quebec while we, at the federal level, the good fellows, we are paying for this Liberal patronage of Mr. Lesage's. That is what you call good patronage; good patronage with good Mr. Lesage.
Mr. Chairman, I quoted the text, clause 5 is clear.
(Text):
No member of the House of Commons shall be admitted to any share or part of any contract, agreement or commission with respect to the project, or to any benefit to arise therefrom. (Translation):
The hon. member for Villeneuve who likes to come out against patronage in other places and people who misuse public funds will have some explaining to do about that. At the same time, he may have a chance to explain what happened, during the Liberal regime in the case of the retaining walls, in Beloeil, where certain foremen were appropriating public funds, cashing cheques of people who were not working, and were making money that way-


Jacques Flynn: Order.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: He might explain what they were doing with that-


Jacques Flynn: Order.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: -Liberal patronage paid out of federal government funds.


Jacques Flynn: Order. Order.
I should point out to the member for Chambly-Rouville that he may be allowed to deal with the matter, but he must show the connection with the Department of Public Works.
I believe that at the moment he has wandered far from the subject, and I would ask him to come back to it.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Mr. Chairman, I feel I have followed your instructions, for I was referring to retaining walls. My remarks were therefore, in some ways, relevant to public works.
I merely want to point out that the clause is quite clear. As far as the hon. member for Villeneuve is concerned, notwithstanding the allegations of hon. members opposite, I have not taken advantage of his absence to talk about it.
I even took the care to mention first that I was sorry he was not here to speak in his own defence.
I now refer to pages 2031 and 2032 of the English Hansard. There is reference there to the member for Villeneuve.
The member for Charlevoix (Mr. Asselin) had addressed him, and here, for the benefit of the house, is the translation of his words, as found on page 6 of the appendix.
(Text):
I am reading from the translation:


Mr. Asselin:: Could the hon. member tell us the name of the engineering Arm which makes the survey of the joint projects?


Mr. Dumas:: This question makes me laugh, Mr. Chairman. To answer it I will tell the hon. member that the department's engineers are those who do the civil engineering work for the construction of the road. But I see what my hon. friend is aiming at, and I must say to him, that as a surveyor, the government of the province of Quebec has asked me to do the surveying for the expropriation of certain parcels of land bordering on this new road from Amos to Mattagami. So, to help ease my hon. friend's concern on this matter, I will read to him-I think I might give this explanation-
I have here a copy of the agreement signed by the government of Canada and that of the province of Quebec with regard to the construction of the road between Amos and Mattagami and I find the following at clause 9 of this agreement: "The cost of these works will not include any amount paid by the province of Quebec towards the project after March 31, 1966, and in all cases will not include the payments made by the province of Quebec towards-"
And I now read subclause (B):
"The purchase of an interest or any land interest in connection with the execution of the project, including compensation or indemnification for the obligatory taking over of the land or for the unfavourable soil of other lands;"
(Translation):


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: You spoke illogically.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: How does the hon. member for Villeneuve explain his conduct regarding the question of land surveying?
He did not reply to the hon. member for Charlevoix. He tried to play on the meaning of section 9 and he was completely wrong.
Perhaps he also forgot on purpose to quote section 5 which is indeed very clear.
The people will judge the hypocrites who claim they do not engage in patronage and who set about practising the worst kind of patronage the moment they are in power.

They favour not only the Liberal lawyers of the province of Quebec but even the engineers and land surveyors who are members of the federal parliament. They are not satisfied with cramming the members of the provincial legislature, they have to give a piece of the cake to the federal members of parliament, who belong to the Liberal party.
Perhaps, one day, the minister of hydraulic resources who is now the Quebec minister of natural resources, will know how to thank the member for St. Denis for the fine work he did during his election which he won by a narrow margin, last June, and in such a way as I do not care to qualify.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: The hon. member should take some rest.
(Text):


Jacques Flynn: Shall item 329 carry?


William Arnold Peters: I have been waiting very patiently for the aftermath of the political storm that has been raised among members from the province of Quebec this evening in order to continue on what I consider to be the estimates of the Department of Public Works. It may be true that these remarks that have been made tonight have been very colourful and that they have given us an insight into Quebec politics. However, I think they have strayed far away from the field that I wanted to go into.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: That is an easy slander.


William Arnold Peters: It is a quiet slander, and a very mild one too, I would say.


Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: Though you are not in the province of Quebec, you can get defeated easily also.


William Arnold Peters: I would imagine it would be a very mild slander. I am quite sure that the hon. member's hide is a mile thick, and that it will never penetrate at all. I think it would not even be considered slander by him at all.
Mr. Chairman, perhaps it would be wise to continue for the next four or five minutes the discussion of the roads to resources program as it affects the province of Quebec. Maybe this would be in the best interests of all concerned. However, I wish to congratulate the minister's department, and not entirely the minister, because I am now thinking of a little clipping which I saw from the Timmins Daily Press under the heading "Ottawa Report" in which with regard to the minister the following is pointed out:
He brought to Ottawa a high reputation from his legal career, honoured as a bencher of the law society of upper Canada, and held in awe by Toronto lawyers as "the terror of the negligence bar". An embittered and humbled opponent in the house dubbed him "the man with the stiletto"; his stiletto is a brilliant, lethal and always colourful tongue.
Business of the House
This may be quite true, but tonight the minister has not had to use it. If he was going to control the debate, I think he would have had to use a broad axe and probably this is not his field.
I should like to compliment the department on the work that has been done. The engineering with which I have had the opportunity to have some connection seems to be of a high calibre; and there seems to be in that department still a carryover from the days of the former minister, now the Secretary of State for External Affairs, in which he said that we would get relatively free from politics. Sometimes it may not be wise to get completely out of this field of politics. I should like to relate one particular incident that happened recently where I think it is an advantage. I want to refer to only one instance in which I asked of the department an investigation into a situation that I thought should be investigated. I gave the department the information as I had it and the investigation was made by the engineer. I happened to be in that area and I went and saw the situation for myself. It was very much as I had been told it was. I have been informed that the former Conservative candidate also visited the area. Rather than being upset about this, I am quite pleased about it because I think now there are three people who have been back to the department and have reported that the situation is very much the way each and every one has reported it. It therefore may not be wise to get too far away from this field. The former Conservative candidate no doubt has at heart the interests of the area in the same way as have the inspector of the department, the engineering branch and I. May I call it ten o'clock, Mr. Chairman?


Jacques Flynn: The hon. member means 10.30.


William Arnold Peters: Yes, 10.30.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder whether I could ask the house leader whether he could indicate with reasonable certainty now what we will be doing tomorrow and Saturday and whether he could give us any idea of what we will be doing up until whatever hour it is we meet on Tuesday evening. Perhaps he could tell us whether under the rules it would be 7.30 or 8.00 o'clock.


Mr. Churchill:: I will announce tomorrow night the business for next week. Tomorrow we will carry on with the estimates of the Department of Public Works. The business

Business of the House
for Saturday will be determined depending on the progress we make tomorrow.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Does the minister not expect to finish public works before tomorrow is out?


Gordon Minto Churchill: I sincerely hope that we shall finish public works tomorrow. It is now June 15.


John Whitney Pickersgill: What will we do then?


Gordon Minto Churchill: If we finish public works early tomorrow we will commence with national defence. But if we do not finish public works in good time tomorrow, I am not certain that we would start with national defence on Saturday. I am open to suggestions from hon. members opposite.


[Stage Direction]
At 10.30 o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to special order.
[Stage Direction]
Friday, June 16, 1961

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. Earl Rowe (Dufferin-Simcoe)
presented the first report of the sessional committee on railways, air lines and shipping, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.