1961-04-21

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier):: I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Is he prepared now to give the house a complete listing of all the legislative measures that must be dealt with before the end of the session?


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I am not prepared to do that now, but I will do so at the earliest possible date. As I said the other day, on Monday I understand there will be before the house a motion for the extension of the hours of sitting. At that time it may be that I shall be in a position to some degree to bring to the house a general resume of the intention of the government with respect to legislation.


Lionel Chevrier: I am grateful to the Prime Minister for his answer, but we on this side of the house had hoped it would be possible to have this list before consideration of the motion.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs based on an article in this morning's Globe and Mail entitled: "UN Aghast at Kennedy's Blundering in Cuba". In view of President Kennedy's clearly announced decision to use the power of the United States to bring eventual victory to the counter-revolutionary forces in Cuba, if he considers it necessary; and in view of Canada's strong and proper criticism of intervention by the British and French at Suez and by the U.S.R.R. in Hungary in 1956, will the government now inform the government of the United States in the strongest terms possible of Canada's opposition to this proposed intervention in Cuba?


Hon. Howard C. Green (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether or not the hon. member wants us to declare war on the United States. Issues of this kind are dealt with in a little more diplomatic fashion than the way suggested by the hon. member. Canada never hesitates to put her view before not only the United States but other countries as well.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Does not the minister consider that Canada, as a friendly nation, can bring this matter to the attention of the United States and the United Nations and make a public statement as to Canada's policy?


Howard Charles Green: The statement made by the hon. member and his attitude are not stamped very heavily with friendliness toward the United States. I should not care to go any further than I have. We are in a position to make representations to the United States and to other countries all over the world, and we do this from time to time as we think the occasion warrants.


Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister say whether any representations on this situation have been made by Canada to the President of the United States?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, if we were to walk into the house and, in answer to questions, explain all the representations that are made to the United States or other countries, it would not be very long before our representations would simply have no value. (Translation):



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolielle-L'Assomplion-Montcalm):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. My question is prompted by an item published in today's issue of Le Devoir.
Why is it that at no time has it been possible for anyone to obtain from employees of the Canadian National Telegraph service, in the Quebec parliament buildings, money orders printed in French?

Inquiries of the Ministry


Hon. Leon Balcer (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, since this matter is solely a responsibility of the Canadian National Railways, I will refer the hon. member's question to the company.
(Text):



TRANSPORTATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister. Has the Prime Minister received representations from the grain trade -that is, the pools and the private elevators -along the lines of the brief which they presented to the royal commission on transportation, in opposition to the abandonment of branch lines as recommended by the royal commission in its first report?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, there have been a number of representations regarding the report made by the royal commission. They are of various types and kinds and deal with various phases in the report.


Lionel Chevrier: A supplementary question. Could the Prime Minister say whether among these various representations there was one from the grain trade along the lines I have suggested in my question?


John George Diefenbaker: At the moment I cannot say there was one that would be representative of the grain trade. Representations have been made by one or more companies in western Canada regarding the problem that would be created in consequence of an accelerated reduction of such facilities as branch lines and the like.



VANCOUVER-REPORTED ESTABLISHMENT OF TREATMENT CENTRE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to either the Minister of National Health and Welfare or the Minister of Justice. I wonder if the attention of either of the ministers has been drawn to a newspaper report containing a statement by Mr. MacLeod, the commissioner of penitentiaries, to the effect that a treatment centre for narcotics addicts will be established in Vancouver. If so, is either of the ministers able to give the house any detailed information upon this subject?


Hon. E. D. Fulton (Minister of Justice):: My attention has not been drawn to the press report referred to, but the house will recall


that a month or two ago I announced on behalf of my colleague the Minister of National Health and Welfare and myself the outline of the government's new approach to the question of the apprehension, treatment and supervision of narcotics addicts. This included the information that we would be establishing a number of narcotic treatment centres, and it is no doubt in accordance with that general outline that Commissioner MacLeod, who is presently in the west, has confirmed the decision already announced that the first of these treatment centres will be opened in British Columbia. The exact location, however, has not yet been settled, and I should be very surprised if the commissioner had stated definitely that it would be established in Vancouver. It will be in the lower mainland area.
(Translation):



NATIONAL DEFENCE


Mr. H. Pif Lessard (Sf. Henry):: I should like to direct a question to the Associate Minister of National Defence. Could the minister indicate whether it is true that the government intends to build armouries in the southwest section of Lafontaine park? While this park does belong to the crown, could the minister give us the assurance that the municipal authorities will be consulted before action is taken on this plan?


Hon. Pierre Sevigny (Associale Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, in reply to the question of the hon. member for St. Henry, I must say no consideration is being given at the moment to building the armouries referred to.
Certainly the Montreal city council will be consulted and advised if the department should decide to build in the Montreal area. (Tprt) *



FLAGS OF CANADA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Laurier Regnier (Sf. Boniface):: I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State. It is reported in both the Winnipeg Free Press and the Winnipeg Tribune of April 18 that the city of Winnipeg has adopted a resolution to the effect that Canada should have a flag featuring the maple leaf; that Canada show her sovereignty by not borrowing from or using a portion of another country's flag, and that the federal government be advised of their decision.

(Translation):
Here is my question. Is the minister aware of this resolution by the city of Winnipeg, and what position does he intend to take in regard to this request?


Hon. Noel Dorion (Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for giving me advance notice of his question. Here is my reply.
1.	As of this morning, I had not yet received a copy of the resolution referred to by the hon. member, but I have read in the Winnipeg Free Press that toy a vote of 10 to 8, such a resolution was passed by the Winnipeg city council.
2.	With regard to the second part of the question, surely the hon. member must realize that the problem is not of my exclusive jurisdiction but is rather a matter for the cabinet, to which of course, I will report on the said resolution when I have received a copy. (Text):



DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur):: I should like to ask the Minister of Justice a question based upon a return which was tabled yesterday regarding a Mr. Syrota of Sault Ste. Marie, who had written to the minister on February 19 about the invasion of his property by the R.C.M.P., according to his claim. Can the minister indicate whether the great length of time, amounting to eight weeks, which elapsed between the letter that Mr. Syrota wrote to the minister and the minister's reply was the result of a very deep investigation into the matter, or the consequence of an oversight?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will recall that the Easter recess intervened during that period. If there was any delay I think the responsibility must be mine, caused by the fact that I spent some twelve days in the eastern and northern Arctic and there was some accumulation of correspondence. Prior to that time I was quite heavily engaged in a number of other matters. If there was any delay in my writing to the gentleman in question it is my fault rather than as the result of a delay in the R.C.M. Police completing their investigation.



SASKATCHEWAN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hazen Robert Argue: I should like to direct a question to the Prime Min-
Supply-Northern Affairs ister. I wonder whether the Prime Minister can report to the house on the progress the government is making in the consideration of Saskatchewan bill No. 56, and has the government yet agreed that the lieutenant governor should sign this bill?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, there is nothing to report. The matter is receiving consideration, and when a decision has been arrived at it will immediately be made available to the house. There will be no unnecessary delay in this connection.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. D. J. Walker (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, on yesterday's orders of the day the hon. member for Welland asked whether any sales of mortgages had taken place or had been negotiated under the recently announced plan that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation will sell mortgages held in its portfolio.
A new type of marketing has to be established. Since it is likely to be a quite important part of the total capital market, it is desirable that there be full discussions in advance with the existent approved lending institutions that may be concerned with the later operations. Accordingly C.M.H.C. is presently working on programs and procedures for discussion with other parties, which include, of course, the Department of Finance and the Bank of Canada.
As I indicated yesterday, no sales have as yet taken place and none have been negotiated under this new plan.



TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont asked me a question yesterday in respect of a letter to the mayor of Montreal. I have before me just the English copy at the moment. I undertook to table the letter today and, if it is agreeable to the house, I will do so as soon as the other is brought to my office.

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



DEPARTMENT OF NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL RESOURCES

[Stage Direction]
279. Departmental administration including Canada's share of the expenses of the "resources for tomorrow" conference, $1,105,390.
3876	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs
Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Chairman, last evening my preliminary remarks had reference to the outlook for the resources for tomorrow conference which is to be held next October. I was suggesting this would not only be a landmark in the history of this department but perhaps a springboard to the future. However, the point I -made earlier about the initiative and vigour of the minister was occasioned by the reaction I obtained from several people in the last few weeks on the resources for tomorrow conference.
Last week an editor of a prominent business magazine in Canada was talking to me. I asked him, "Why have you not mentioned the resources for tomorrow conference? I have not noticed any editorial comment or any indication at all of the conference." This editor of this prominent business magazine in Canada said "What conference?" I said, "The resources for tomorrow conference." I point out that these big flies in the main contain material on the conference that I picked up from the secretariat. Here was a man who has not heard of the conference. He was quite willing to accept the onus; he said he had just not heard of it. I ask the minister what kind of preparation he has made for the conference when a man in a position such as this has not even heard of it, and the program has been under way for two years. The preparation has been going on that long and we are having the conference this year.
This is shocking enough to me, but during the Easter vacation I was making a tour of my riding. I encountered the president of the district council, lumber and saw mill workers union, an organization that has approximately 11,000 people working in the bush just at this particular time. It is the strongest union in the woods in Ontario. It is a militant union that carries its organization right out into the bush. It is in constant negotiation and is having conflict with many of the companies, but it is recognized as a very able organization. I could refer the minister to any number of articles in various magazines such as Business Week, Saturday Night and Executive, all dealing with the impact of this union upon this great resource industry in Ontario.
I said to the president of this particular union, "Who is going from your union to the resources for tomorrow conference?". His reply was "What conference?". I said, "The resources for tomorrow conference". He said "I have not heard anything about it. I vaguely know there is some such thing going on, but I have not heard anything about it". I said "Surely you had an invitation". He said "No". I said "Have you considered that you might perhaps get together with the I.W.A. and the Catholic union in Quebec? After all, labour


is a very important part of this greatest industry we have in Canada?" He said, "It is funny; I was talking to Mr. Ladd of I.W.A. not so long ago. He did not mention anything about it. I doubt whether he has heard much about it or had any invitation".
My point is that here is an indication that this fundamental conference, which could be a springboard to the future, is really unknown by people who should have an intimate relationship with it and, so far as the labour people are concerned, should be playing a very active part in it. This is one of the disappointments about the papers that are listed in the information bulletin No. 1. There is no indication here that organized labour is playing any real part in this conference; yet wherever one turns to hear about the problems of Canada today in the export trade

and that is where our resources industries concentrate-the accusation or the criticism is often made that our wage policy is pricing us out of this trade or market, or we have not the labour where we need it; we do not have labour mobility.
It does seem strange that one should project a conference of this importance, spend a whole lot of money on it and two years in its preparation, have a secretariat that is spending a fair amount of money and giving a fair amount of leadership, and not get the information out to places and to people who could take a more positive role.
Having said that, I do not want to leave the impression that I think the basic work of the secretariat has not been sound. I have heard from provincial sources that the whole plan of the conference did not crystallize in any dynamic way until the new minister from Quebec came to the fore. I am referring to Mr. Rene Levesque. Without commenting upon Mr. Levesque's politics, I think it is about the most exciting news that anyone with interest in resources could hear that the minister from Quebec was prepared to come in, and not just drag along but to give leadership in putting this conference upon a realistic basis. I think praise cannot be too great for something like this. I know that we need such leadership in Ontario, because there is a tendency for our people in the resources field to slumber along and look at Ontario more as a little nation of our own in a resource sense rather than as an integral part of the nation. If we can be complimentary for a contribution that has been made, we would like to give that support to Mr. Rene Levesque.
Last year when I raised a question about the resources for tomorrow conference I received a letter dated August 11, 1960 from

the then minister of northern affairs and national resources. The letter contains this statement:
To these official policy statements I would add that the conference is designed to put us-and by "us" I mean all participants-in a better judgment position in regard to the many related questions of land and water use and the conservation and development of resources in all their ramifications. It is intended to bring out for discussion all the known facts in this connection through research papers-
Then the letter goes on:
We cannot, of course, expect the conference-given its composition-to be able to decide or even to be able to recommend clearly upon action. But we will all without any doubt be in a better position after the conference to make informed decisions about how to improve the use of our renewable resources, so that the nation can draw a higher income from them without prejudicing the supply.
Later we find this remark in the letter:
The question of foreign ownership of capital will be considered indirectly in reviewing the sources of capital for resource development. Perhaps the conference will suggest how best to channel Canadian funds into resource development.
Now, I did ask the minister whether there was any intention of dealing with cost-benefit analysis in this conference, which is a need we have at the present time in order to get resources development. The minister's answers to questions earlier in the session indicated that cost-benefit analysis will be incidental. There are several papers that touch upon that subject and I was delighted to see that according to the schedule the second part of the conference program will include two workshops dealing with capital requirements, income and employment effects. The conference will conclude in plenary session on Saturday, October 28, with a session dealing with capital requirements, income and employment effects of renewable resources development.
This is not the time, Mr. Chairman, for any kind of philosophical analysis. However, as one who believes that planning or democratic socialism is the only future for Canada and the Canadian economy, I recognize that this conference and the approach to it is a step in that direction. For that reason we are enthusiastic about it.
This year the government created something like a national planning board, in effect, with Mr. George DeYoung as its head, called the national productivity council. I should like to ask the minister whether arrangements have been made to have the members of this council attend the resources for tomorrow conference. There is not much purpose in having an esoteric discussion unless there is liaison or some means of carrying out the recommendations and ideas that come forward in the conference. For that
Supply-Northern Affairs reason I should like to know just how much effort is to be made by this national productivity council to work with the conference and the conference secretariat.
There is another question I should like to discuss with the minister. What steps are being planned to see that the initiative that comes from the conference is not lost or dissipated? Is any consideration being given to a continuing secretariat or to making the secretariat a part of the national productivity council? It seems to me there is a very direct relationship here. I would very much welcome any information in that regard that the minister can give.
Referring to another aspect of the minister's responsibilities, I might say that in looking at the map on pages 34 and 35 of the annual report I was astounded to see that one of the roads projected there seems to run from somewhere in my constituency near Armstrong or Nipigon all the way up into northern Manitoba. I have had given to me by the minister a return dealing with the roads in northern Ontario which have been approved. I just cannot match the roads shown in the return with those shown on the map. I should like to ask the minister whether approval has been given for the complete length of the road which is shown by a dotted line running from near lake Nipigon all the way up into northern Manitoba, or whether this represents a survey only. I certainly would like to argue that in time we will need that kind of road to open up that area. However, I have not received any impression from the information I have been given that such a road is a sure thing or that the whole business has been confirmed.
I might repeat to the minister something that he has heard from a number of other members in the last few years. I am sure that one of the great disillusionments with the Diefenbaker government stems from the feeling of people in areas such as I represent, in which we have always talked about our unlimited resources, our untapped resources. They know that these lie much closer to the markets and industries of North America, and when they find that the great northern vision is prematurely focusing on the wrong places, the disillusion is immense. After all, when you have very large iron ore resources in northern Ontario; great forest resources that are still not exploited; when you have oil wells and gas wells capped in Alberta; when within 100 or 120 miles of the border you have all these natural resources that are not being exploited although these areas have been built on optimistic hopes for the future, it comes as quite a shock to have the northern vision put to you at a time when you are languishing yourself. I can only say to the

Supply-Northern Affairs minister that this does not mean that I or anyone else would suggest to him that the responsibilities of the department in this field should be allowed to lapse. I suggest to him that if the northern vision became a southern vision it would probably have a more beneficial effect for the Diefenbaker government in the long run.
Another point upon which I wanted to touch very briefly, Mr. Chairman, concerns one sentence in the annual report of the department. This sentence refers to the standard of living, buildings and morale in the Mackenzie river area as exceedingly low. I think that is the phrase, "exceedingly low". Certain steps are being taken to correct the situation, and I should like to hear from the minister. Here we have a statement as it was provided late last year. I should like to hear from the minister why this is so.
Perhaps the hon. member for Yukon can provide us with the answer. The government has been in power now for four years, or approximately that period of time. We have had this department of northern affairs for a much longer time than that. Yet we have been told that morale is exceedingly low in a very important sector of the minister's responsibility, and it is acknowledged in the annual report. I like this kind of frankness, but I should like to have some documentation as to the reasons and to have a little more information as to the steps that are being taken to change the situation.
I have often felt that frequently parliamentary committees make recommendations that fall away and just disappear. One of the things I should like the minister to provide for me and other members who may be interested, after the minister's estimates are through, is an appraisal of all recommendations that have been made with regard to his department by parliamentary committees, and the consideration that has been given to them. I think this may be something that the committee itself should expect. I see no reason why we should not know.
I may have been off base last night in expressing the suggestion that this department had been the one most criticized by parliamentary committees. However, whether or not I was off base, I know that many criticisms have been made. Having regard to the criticisms and the recommendations, I should like to know what consideration has been given to them by the department and where they stand at the present time. As someone who took part in the deliberations of the committee for a considerable portion of the time, may I suggest that it would bring into some kind of focus what we were doing.

I should hope we could get through the minister's estimates without getting off into any bitter avenues such as those which were revealed here last night in relation to the fact that French is not taught to the Eskimos in northern Quebec. The minister gave us the information that 90 per cent, I think it was, of the children in this particular area are in the Anglican church. The only suggestion I can make to the committee as a teacher is that it is difficult enough to teach children coming from a culture or a civilization that is not as steady or as stable as our own without getting into the question of teaching two foreign languages or having to operate within three languages. I can say this with absolute conviction because, despite the fact that I took French for eight or nine years in school myself, all I can do is read it; I would not have the temerity to try to speak it.


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


Douglas Mason Fisher: Yes.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Am 1 correct in understanding that the hon. member said that the French language would be a foreign language in Canada?


Douglas Mason Fisher: 
Mr. Martel:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few remarks before the first item of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources is carried.
I shall avail myself of this opportunity to thank the minister sincerely for the explanations he gave yesterday, and more particularly to underline the fact that, as he said himself in his statement, his first formal duty when he became minister was the signing of the agreement between the government of Canada which he was representing on that occasion, and the provincial government of Quebec, represented by the Hon. Paul Earl, then minister of mines for the province, when the province of Quebec participated in the roads to resources program. It gives me pleasure to stress the fact, as the three roads which were the object of that understanding will be jointly built by the federal and provincial governments, with the federal government paying 50 per cent of the total building costs.
These three roads are within the limits of Chapleau riding, which I have the honour to represent in this house.
The minister also was kind enough to explain the proposed program in a general way, or at least the various divisions under his
Supply-Northern Affairs department. I should like to mention briefly in that respect, a few points which concern his department.
I shall now briefly describe the three roads I mentioned and which are to be built in the northern part of Chapleau riding. I have here a copy of the agreement signed in Quebec on October 19, 1960, which is very elaborate. I have no intention, of course, to read it fully into the official record, but I should like, if I may, Mr. Chairman, to give a description of those roads, as they are located within the boundary of my riding.
First of all, there is the road between Amos and Mattagami, a distance of approximately 118 miles. This is a new road. Some sections were started and even completed a few years ago, but they had to be widened or improved. This road goes northward from Amos, up to the Mattagami lake district, or more accurately to the Allard river, where a mining company owns a very interesting property, the New Hosco mine. That road will also serve other mines in the Mattagami lake district, like the Mattagami Lake Mines, the Orchan Mines and other mining companies which have been doing some exploratory work since 1956 in that area, which is about 100 miles to the north of the town of Amos.
The second road is a section, or a new road, should I say, leading from lake Waconi-chi to lake Albanel, to the north of the Chapais and Chibougamau region. The new road, 95 miles long, will stretch up to a few miles beyond the 51st parallel, on the eastern shore of lake Albanel, that is to the east of that lake, an area where vast iron deposits have already been discovered. Indeed, the whole area around Albanel lake and great Mistassini lake offers immense mining opportunities.
The third stretch is the road between the cities of Chapais and Desmaraisville.
In addition, in the northern part of the constituency, a 30-mile stretch will link up southern Abitibi with the northern part of the area.
For many years, or at least since the area of Chapais and Chibougamau was opened up, about 10 years ago, there was no connection between the two sections of that part of our area. As a result, people had to travel either by air or by road, covering over 1,000 miles, depending on where they started from in the Abitibi area. Needless to say this road will be a tremendous boon, as it will shorten the distance between the Abitibi and the Chapais and Chibougamau area to ap-

Supply-Northern Affairs proximately 200 miles, depending of course on the particular starting point in the Abitibi.
A fourth item of interest to the province of Quebec, in the federal-provincial agreement, provides as follows:
Resource development roads in various sections of the province, the location of which will be determined by the provincial minister, subject to written approval by the minister.
This refers of course, to future roads planned for northern Quebec. I shall therefore be brief on this subject.
However, I felt it was my duty, as representative of the Chapleau constituency, to mention those three stretches of road. One of them is already under construction, between Amos and Mattagami, while the others are to be built shortly, as soon as the provincial authorities can get around to it, because the federal government has agreed to contribute as its share up to 50 per cent of construction costs.
Another program of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources is of particular interest to my constituents and myself. I refer to hydrometric studies, that is to say the study of water streams in James bay, north of Barraute and Senneterre, where important mining developments are under way and where a railroad is also being constructed.
The streams being surveyed in the James bay basin are the Bell or Nottaway, Broad-back, Rupert and Eastmain rivers.
This study is being conducted jointly by the federal and provincial authorities. The work was started a couple of years ago, and the provincial government is at the same time making a survey of possible hydraulic resources in those rivers.
I understand that the survey program is still going on and that an office was opened by the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources in Senneterre in 1958 or 1959, from which the people working on the survey start off in the spring, after the thaw-out.
Another scheme was also placed before the committee of mines, forests and waters last year.
I asked a question to the minister during this session concerning the Grand Canal project, as it is called in English. That project concerns the Harricanaw river.
I think that is a problem the department should be seriously considering. It should have a complete survey made of the possibilities, in order to decide whether the project would be self-sustaining in the years to come.
[Mr. Martel.l
We all know that in the southern United States, there is a problem of fresh water supply, whose solution may dangerously affect the situation in Canada, since the authorities of the state of Illinois or of Chicago are planning to divert the waters of lake Michigan. In fact, such diversion would channel lake Michigan waters into the Mississippi basin.
Of course this is an international problem, which will require the co-operation of the United States. If there were an increase in the volume of water already diverted into the Mississippi basin, south of Chicago, this will seriously affect the Great lakes, as was explained last year in the committee of mines, forests and waterways. Furthermore, that diversion would be detrimental to navigation on the St. Lawrence seaway.
Again I say this is not only an international problem but a national one. We know that if navigation on the St. Lawrence seaway is threatened or curtailed, our trade will considerably suffer as a result.
Consequently, I think it would be in order to make a complete survey of fresh water supply diverted into James bay and to the north, in view of the urgent need which might develop in the coming years, both in the United States, particularly in those states bordering on Canada, and in this country too, in the Great lakes area.
We know that the southern United States are fast becoming industralized.
I believe that when the survey is completed, we shall be in a position to establish exactly not only the fresh water needs of those states, but also the dangers involved in the diversion of more water through Chicago or south of Chicago.
Again I say that such diversion would affect the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence seaway.
Consequently, if there is a possibility of using the fresh water running into James bay, it would perhaps be wise-I think, for my part, the project is really worth studying-that we should start working on it and try to solve it as soon as possible.
Besides, I think the department has already set up an observation post to measure the volume of water on the Harricanaw river, at Amos, and the statistics that have been compiled for several years may help survey work northward up to the mouth of that river.
Before closing, Mr. Chairman, I should like to comment on some remarks made by the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont (Mr. APRIL 21, 1961
Deschatelets), especially when he tried to suggest that the credit for northern vision should not necessarily be claimed by the Conservative government, but rather by the former minister of northern affairs and national resources who is now premier of the province of Quebec.
It is quite possible; I was not a member of parliament in 1953, as was the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont. However, he overlooked one point and it is this: if the former minister of northern affairs and national resources was already possessed of that northern vision, as he says, the government of the time certainly did not believe him. It was only when the Conservative government came into power that the program he was then advocating, or at least the development of northern areas was applied.
I am not afraid of saying now that, with the present minister, we are on the right course and that people up north are delighted at the greater consideration they are getting from this government.
Another point I wish to emphasize is that the Prime Minister of Canada (Mr. Diefen-baker) is quite conversant with northern problems. This is something I have mentioned during the last two election campaigns, in 1957 and in 1958.
In fact, the Prime Minister has never resided anywhere but in the northern part of this country; he knows the problems of northern Canada and he will no doubt be the best prime minister the people of the north will ever have had, because he knows their problems and tries to find practical solutions for them.
I will now close my remarks, Mr. Chairman. I may have further comment to make, but I will wait until the detailed discussion of the department's estimates.


Mr. Bourgel:: Would the hon. member for Chapleau allow me a question? If I understood him rightly, he declared himself in favour of a joint program of roads to resources, contrary to the views expressed by his friends in the Quebec parliamentary opposition.
Could the hon. member tell us if this joint project constitutes a violation of provincial autonomy?


Mr.   Marlel@: Mr. Speaker, I may say that the question put by the hon. member for Levis is in the nature of a trap, because this is a matter which comes mainly under the provincial government's jurisdiction. However, the hon. member might be interested to know that action under the roads
Supply-Northern Affairs to resources program had already been taken by the previous administration, and that the present government of the province of Quebec has merely been carrying on negotiations with a view to reaching agreement with the federal government. In fact, I have here a copy of the correspondence exchanged between the two governments in that regard.
As to whether I agree with the views of the leader of the opposition of the province of Quebec, I think this is strictly a provincial matter, and so far I have been concerned only with federal politics.
(Text):


Mr. Nielsen:: Before embarking on a discussion of the minister's estimates I should like to thank him and the officials of his department for the co-operation they have given me last year and, indeed, during the whole of the time I have been here. Every suggestion I have made to them has been carefully considered, and I am very grateful to them and to the minister. I should like to express the gratitude of my constituents for the results that have been experienced, since the majority of the suggestions I have put forward have been accepted.
I intend to discuss the estimates of the department under three particular headings; the political development of the north in a non-partisan sense, the material development and the human development. But before doing that I want to comment on the remarks of the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont, who spoke last night on the estimates of this department. Never have I heard so much drivel or so much senseless discussion concerning the north. The hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont did not make one constructive remark last night, not one accurate statement concerning those areas above the 60th parallel. He made all sorts of show in producing submissions made to the Gordon commission by those two territories, and by quoting sketchy verbal excerpts from these representations the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont attempted to garner credit for his party for the tremendous increase in expenditure and activity which have occurred north of the 60th parallel since the present Prime Minister came to power.
The fact of the matter is that the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont does not know the north, and he is certainly not familiar with the activities of the department in the last three years. If he was, he would know that while the government which he supported was in office, in 1956-57 the

Supply-Northern Affairs estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources amounted to $39 million. If the hon. member were familiar with these things he would know that in the following year the estimates amounted to $53,700,000; these figures are approximate. He would also know that as soon as the government changed hands in 1958-59 the estimates of this department rose to $83 million.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Would the hon. member permit a question at this point? He was referring a moment ago to the credit of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources in 1956-57. Does he know that in addition to this credit we should add also the tremendous expenditures of the Department of National Defence, the Department of Public Works-


Mr. Graffley:: Order. On a question of
privilege, the hon. member rose, he said, to ask a question, but he is not doing that. He is making a statement, and that is why I am rising on a question of privilege-


An hon. Member:: It cannot be a question of privilege.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: It is true I made the statement, but I was asking the hon. member to comment on that statement to see whether he was aware of this.


Erik Nielsen: Of course I am aware of it, Mr. Chairman. But the same story could be told about the estimates of the Department of Transport, the estimates of the Department of National Defence, the estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare or, indeed, of any other federal government department which operates in the north. All of them have shown increases in their estimates in ratios comparable to those I am citing now. Activity has increased at least fivefold among all the federal departments in the north. It is very notable if one lives there. One cannot help but notice the difference between then and now.
I will continue the statistics I have been giving and tell the hon. member for Maison-neuve-Rosemont, in case he should have overlooked this, that in 1959-60 the estimates of the department jumped to $89,898,000-almost $90 million-and this year they amount to $81,500,000, though if forestry is added they amount, as the minister has told us, to $3 million more than last year. So that from 1956-57, when the estimates of the department stood at $40 million, they have increased to almost $100 million. In fact they have more than doubled, the figure standing at $90 million last year.
This is reflected in what one sees in the north as compared with what one did not see

in the past. I do not want to be unfair regarding what has been accomplished. There were accomplishments by the previous government in the north, and I will say that the accomplishments were misdirected. I will give credit to the previous government for initiating the Gordon commission study, because that study provided the basis for some of the planning that was done so matters could go ahead when the government took office. Do not forget, however, that the Gordon commission plan, such as it was in so far as roads and other developments in the north were concerned, was predicated on a 25-year program. That program has been consolidated and accelerated into a program for some five to ten years. I do not know the exact time that has been allotted to the program by the department, but undoubtedly the minister will enlighten us. It certainly has been accelerated a good deal.
As a result of living in the north myself I am able to enlighten the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont by telling him that a good many things have occurred in the north in the last three years under this government that do not appear in the Gordon commission report. In my own riding of Yukon, and the story can be duplicated in respect of the Northwest Territories, we have the construction of a new school at Dawson city, a new school and teacherage at Mayo Landing, a health centre at Haines Junction and Watson Lake, a new school at Whitehorse, two $1 million hostels at Whitehorse, a new school under construction at Whitehorse, a new federal building under construction at Dawson city and houses and apartments built for federal civil servants in the Whitehorse area, none of which appear in the Gordon commission report. There has been an amazing and beneficial change in the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation legislation which has allowed building to proceed under that legislation in the Yukon where none was in existence before this government took office. Not one single unit was built previously under the National Housing Act in the Yukon, yet this year I anticipate there will be 50 to 70 units under construction or completed under N.H.A.
Let us focus the attention of this committee on the road program in the north. The hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont has attempted to garner credit for the plans of this government in connection with the road construction program now going ahead in the north for the development of our resources there. During the fiscal year 1957-58 some $3.8 million was spent on construction and development of roads in the north. In 1959-60 some $8.2 million was spent in this regard, and in 1960-61 the sum of $6.2 million was

spent. Included in the estimates of the department for this fiscal year is provision for an expenditure of $8.4 million. The average amount provided for this fundamental development purpose by the government is $6.5 million over these years. Contrasting this with the record of the previous administration, where the average was $1.5 million, I suggest to the hon. member that is a very telling comparison.
The attack by that hon. member last night regarding the Liberal planning program referred not to a planning program at all. The planning had to be done when the government changed, and that planning, I must say, has gone ahead, contrary to the opinion of the hon. member for Port Arthur, under the direction of the civil service staffing the department who are devoted, dedicated and altruists of the highest order. The deputy minister is a man who I consider the government, and that department particularly, is fortunate in having at the reins of this important department of government. I have not seen dedication like his for many years. I certainly hope that he stays with the department because I am sure, with his qualifications, the attractions for employment outside the government service must indeed be tempting.
I want to associate myself with only one remark made by the hon. member for Maison-neuve-Rosemont, on a matter introduced by the minister, and that is the wish that the hon. member for Mackenzie River will be back with us in this house within the shortest possible time to give us the benefit of his knowledge of the affairs of the Mackenzie river area.
I would point out one further discrepancy in the remarks made by the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont for which he can perhaps be excused, when he said last night and I use his words taken from page 7 of the translation appearing in last night's Hansard, as follows:
-farming is only possible in and around the Mackenzie district-
I would like to inform him that there is a good potential for agricultural development in the Yukon as well as in the Mackenzie district. In keeping abreast with developments in this regard I can tell him also that under the very able leadership of the Minister of Agriculture, who is extremely familiar with the problems confronting northern development, a committee has been set up of representatives from his department, the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources and other federal government departments, interested, for the specific purpose of assessing that agricultural potential in the Yukon and devising a method of land
Supply-Northern Affairs allotment so that the development can go ahead. I might say this is the first time that this sort of attack has been made in an endeavour to proced with the agricultural development in my riding.
I think the remarks made by the hon. member for Port Arthur concerning the minister were quite deplorable. He said he was disappointed in the change of ministers. I might say that I was most disappointed that the hon. member for Port Arthur saw fit to be critical of the minister in this rather personal fashion. I certainly do not know this minister as well as I knew the previous minister, but since I have been in the house I have had several discussions with him, and must say that from my observations he has certainly been one of the most active and virile of the members taking part in the activities of this house.
I must say that this is contrary to an interview I read in the Toronto Telegram Week End magazine of July 16, 1960 with the hon. member for Port Arthur. According to that article the hon. member believes that too many parliamentary backbenchers often unwillingly, lead an aimless and frustrating existence as time-servers, merely voting "yea" or "nay" at the call of their party. The hon. member went on to say, according to the article, that he himself is so dissatisfied with life as a member of parliament that he intends to go back to teaching school after the next election is called. While I think this is perhaps-


Douglas Mason Fisher: Could I ask the hon. member to identify the article? If it is the one I think it is I might say that I wrote it myself and do not think it can be attributed to someone else.


Erik Nielsen: Yes, I was referring to an article which appeared in the Toronto Telegram Week End magazine for July 16, 1960, which has quite a complimentary picture of the hon. member for Port Arthur appearing on the front.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I would like to inform the hon. member that I wrote the article myself and was paid for it.


Mr. Dinsdale:: You are showing your usual modesty.


Erik Nielsen: I simply used the article to point out to the hon. member for Port Arthur that the industry displayed by the minister, certainly from my observation of his activities in the house, is not consistent with the views of the hon. member in respect of the activities or non-activities of most hon. members in this house. When it comes to taking part in activities in this house on behalf of my own

Supply-Northern Affairs constituents, I can tell the hon. member that I devote all my time to those activities.
Let me pass to the political development of the north. In this respect I believe that some considerable thought is about due. I am not suggesting for a moment that considerable thought has not already been given to this problem, but I think a concentrated second look at the political development of the north is required. I think I heard wrongly, or that the C.B.C. reported the minister wrongly during the Easter recess, when in a speech before the Yellowknife board of trade he was reported as advocating that the Yukon and the Mackenzie river districts could be best combined in order to create the eleventh province of Canada in due course. I do not believe the minister intended to say that. As a matter of fact I do not believe he did say it. Perhaps the C.B.C. had him all wrong on it.
Of course this is practically, politically, historically and geographically impossible in my view. I feel that the Yukon, with its traditions, its history, its geography and its economy must be created a province by itself when the time comes. I am not suggesting that that should be forthwith, but certainly the economic development seems to be progressing at a pace which makes this look possible within a decade.
Here again I must disagree with the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont and other hon. members, particularly the hon. member for Welland, for one, the hon. member for Renfrew North for another and the Leader of the Opposition, for a third, who have been ridiculing the vision, and using the word "vision" with derision in their voices. Not one of them realizes the pace and the tempo that the north is feeling at the moment as a result of this government's activities there. As a direct result of the development road program there I can say that exploration activity has been increased to the point where we in Canada-I do not say we in the Yukon -have the world's largest known tungsten deposit, which was discovered in 1958 and which is slated for production in the fall of 1962. This is a strategic metal of great importance. Before this discovery we produced no tungsten in Canada. We will now be in a position to supply, for instance, the whole of the United States demand for tungsten. This discovery was the direct result of this development road program. Therefore I suggest to hon. members that they do not underestimate the benefit to the whole of Canada of the program which this government is following.
The minister will likely enlighten us on the statement reported by the C.B.C. concerning the combining of the Mackenzie district and

the Yukon. There are many reasons why such a suggestion is completely incompatible with practicality.
Another matter that I wish to raise for the minister's attention is the point that the Northwest Territories, as hon. members know, being divided into three districts, namely the Mackenzie river district, the Keewatin district and the Franklin district, is an extremely large area indeed. The hon. member for Mackenzie River has as his riding only the Mackenzie river district. The whole of the eastern mainland above the 60th parallel, the Keewatin district, and the whole of the Franklin district comprising all the Canadian archipelago and the islands of the far north, are without representation in the House of Commons. There are Canadian citizens disfranchised; civil servants, members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, missionaries and a substantial population in those two areas who should be entitled to be heard in this house. I have had correspondence from such organizations as the Baker Lake citizens association, who have asked that this be brought to the attention of hon. members so that some solution might be found.
In my view the solution does not lie in placing the responsibility for representing those people in the hands of the hon. member for Mackenzie River. He has his hands full now in representing his own vast area. I believe the solution lies in the creation of an additional electoral district to take in this area so that Canada may be truly 100 per cent represented. It certainly is not now when we have this vast area with, as I say, a substantial population without a member in this house.
I would also draw the attention of the minister to the fact that neither the Yukon nor the Northwest Territories has Senate representation. The solution of the problem here requires the amendment of the British North America Act in order to qualify the Yukon and the Northwest Territories for Senate representation. Both these matters were covered by bills which I introduced in the house last year. I would judge by the number of bills on the order paper this year it would be very unlikely that, should I introduce the legislation again this year, it would receive any consideration.
I feel that the department should attempt to extract from its very busy agenda some time to develop a political blueprint for the development of the north. It should develop a formula such as that which was developed when Manitoba was created a province in the years prior thereto. I am sure the minister, who remembers the history of his province, will recall the formula which was developed there. When the population increased by

2,000 an additional seat was added to the council. When the number totalled 20 or 21, 1 forget which, the council was converted into a full-fledged provincial legislature. Some such formula should be worked out for the Yukon territory so that when the economy of the Yukon does reach the stage where we are ready to take on the responsibility of a province, a blueprint will be there and we shall be following an organized course.
I am very grateful to the previous minister for following the suggestion which I put before him as soon as I came to the house of increasing the number of members of the Yukon legislative council from five to seven. This provided for more equitable representation on the legislative council in the Yukon and also enlarged the council so the minister could accept the suggestion of creating an advisory committee on finance, which will be formed after the next election in the territory this year. This advisory committee on finance is the first tottering step toward selfgovernment in the Yukon, in that the commissioner will now be obliged, mandatorily, to consult with the advisory committee before he prepares his budget.
I am sure hon. members realize that in the Yukon Territory the council is wholly elected, as contrasted with the Northwest Territories where four members of a nine-man council are elected and the other five are appointed by the federal government, so that in the Yukon we are substantially ahead, probably because of our historical development, of the Northwest Territories in the development of our political affairs.
The indemnity of our council members should be mentioned here, I believe, because it is much too low to attract the calibre of individual that you want to attract to this legislative body. The present members of the council are extremely idealistic people; if they were not they would not stay around long for the indemnity they get. Some of them are not going to run again simply because too much time is taken from their own businesses and the remuneration is really only nominal. I feel that the indemnity of council members should be increased.
The members of this committee will wonder why I am bringing this point to the minister's attention. The reason is simple. The members of the Yukon legislative council, as a body, cannot introduce or pass legislation which has anything to do with the expenditure of funds. This legislation must all be introduced by the commissioner, who is the personal representative of the minister in the Yukon Territory. The same situation prevails, I believe, in the Northwest Territories.
Supply-Northern Affairs
I want to mention, for want of a better or less inflammatory term, the bureaucratic rigidity of the administration in the Yukon. I do not make these remarks deprecatingly at all, but in the hope that I may get through to those in the administration who may read these remarks, and in the hope that the minister might devise some method of educating those who are responsible to him for the administrative functions of his department in the Yukon. I have no reason to suspect that the same conditions do not prevail in the administrative centres of the Northwest Territories. The bureaucratic rigidity of which I speak is a mental state more than anything else. It is a state in which all suggestions and ideas, unless they are those of the administration, are immediately received in a negative fashion. They are not received in such a way as to give the impression that the administration there wants new ideas. They are not fondled and developed if they are good or discarded if they are not good. These ideas are simply looked at with immediate prejudice and greeted with the remark, well, the department has this plan or that plan and anything less than that is not worthy of the consideration which obviously the person making the proposal has given to it.
I want to make it clear that I do not advance these remarks deprecatingly at all. However, there is a certain outlook toward these things by the administration which I feel has to be changed. If this rigidity continues it can only retard development. As a specific example in this regard I might cite the load limits in the Yukon Territory. The administration, without any real consideration of the matter, at one time imposed arbitrary limits on Yukon roads which affected the outflow of mining products from those areas. This was done without any study by the administration and, I believe to the credit of the minister's predecessor and his officials, without consultation with the department here. Nevertheless this is the type of thing-


The Chairman:: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but his time has expired.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: We have no objection to the hon. member continuing if he has only a few more remarks to make.


Jacques Flynn: Is there any objection to the hon. member continuing?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Erik Nielsen: I thank the committee for its courtesy. I should like to say also that such rigidity on the part of the administration discourages settlement in these northern areas. In this regard I would point specifically to the hundreds of applications for land in the Yukon. When an applicant decides he would

Supply-Northern Affairs like a piece of land upon which to settle, it sometimes takes years to get through all the red tape and obtain a lease. There are cases in which it has taken as long as six or seven years from the date on which the applicant applied for a plot of land before he has been told he can have the land or he cannot.
I realize that the whole organization has been altered in respect of this matter and I must say that, having read the outline of the reorganization, I consider it to be a great advance over the previous procedures. Nevertheless some impetus must still be given to eliminate these undue and retarding factors that exist in the present policy. For instance, I am sure the minister is aware of the fact that a price of $16 per acre has been set on agricultural land. Here in Ontario this might seem to be a meagre amount for an acre of agricultural land. However, in the north, where growing is a problem anyway, I am given to understand this amount is about five times greater than the same acre of land would cost in northern Alberta or northern British Columbia. Agricultural development will not be achieved when the price of land is completely out of reach of the settlers who are going into this high cost area in an attempt to farm.
The salary and position of the commissioner, I think, should come under the scrutiny of the department. You cannot expect the commissioner of the Yukon Territory, whoever he might be, to accept the responsabilities involved in handling millions and millions of dollars on a salary of $13,000 per year. This position calls for a highly skilled excutive, and the salary should be commensurate with that position and should be such that we can attract the most capable men in industry to undertake the position of chief administrator. Certainly he should be at least at the deputy minister level.
The ordinances that are passed by the Yukon legislative council are all prepared here in Ottawa. This is an absolutely unacceptable process to have the ordinances prepared 4,000 miles from the seat of the local legislature. There is only one solution to that problem, and that is the creation of the position of law clerk for the Yukon legislative council. I believe that if the department looked hard enough and set an attractive enough salary, they would have no difficulty in getting a capable man to fill the position.
There is one other thing in connection with the political development of the north that I should like to mention. Under existing procedures the commissioner alone has the complete management of the territorial civil service, which is fairly considerable. The territory is partly administered by the federal

civil service, under the minister's department, and partly by the territorial civil service. This whole system of the territorial civil service should come under the closest scrutiny. Certainly it should not be under the management of one man, because the system is subject to abuse if this continues to be the case. I am not suggesting that there has been any abuse, but all members can immediately see the possibility of playing favourites by hiring friends and the possibility of taking out vindictiveness by firing enemies. The complete absence of any cohesive civil service organization in the territories simply means a denial of the fair application of those principles which we all like to think exist under the civil service commission of Canada. I feel that some miniature civil service commission is required in the Yukon so that we can develop procedures of a competitive nature and put job opportunities in the territorial civil service on a fair basis.
Another reason for a change in this situation is that there are no grievance procedures at all for employees of the territorial civil service. If the commissioner does not feel that he wants to accept the representations of an employee who feels himself to be aggrieved, he is not obliged to do so. There is no recourse for the employees whatsoever.
I have now concluded my remarks concerning the political development of the territory. I have other remarks to make on the material development and on the human development in the north. However, I feel that I should at this stage allow other members of the committee to rise. I will bring these other matters up for consideration at a later stage in these proceedings.


Mr. Carter:: Before I come to the questions which I wish to bring before the minister I want to say a word in reply to what has been said by the hon. member for Yukon, who has just taken his seat. From time to time we see in the papers reports about the slow progress being made in the House of Commons, and every so often the leader of the house will tell us that we have spent so many days on this item and so many days on that subject. I wish to put on record here the statement that if we are going to play politics with every question that comes before the House of Commons, that situation can be the only result. If the government or members of the government party introduce political notes, they must expect to have replies made to them. The hon. member for Yukon said that this party had derided the vision. I think he said that he had heard nothing but derision of the vision. I have not been aware of any derision of anything by members of this party, certainly of no derision of the vision.

But if there has been derision of anything it has been derision of the ballyhoo which this government has put forward with regard to the northern vision.


Mr. Lambert:: Your own leader lead you in it.


Chesley William Carter: How could members of this party deride the vision? The vision did not originate with the Tory party or with the present Prime Minister.


Erik Nielsen: That is rot.


Chesley William Carter: It is not rot. The vision originated with the party that created this department; I refer to the department that is before us now. That is something that was done since I have come to this House of Commons, and that is not so very long ago. If there had been no vision there would have been no Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. The hon. member should not allow himself to get carried away with the idea that there was no vision until the Conservative party took office. We do our work in a quieter and more effective way, without all the publicity and the ballyhoo which amounts to words and nothing else. If the hon. member wishes to make invidious comparisons may I say that one cannot just do it on the basis of dollars and cents. We must take into consideration the circumstances that prevailed at the time the allocations were made and when this department was set up. It had to be organized. The groundwork had to be done and plans had to be laid. That was done. Progress was made, and I am glad to note that progress is continuing, but let hon. members opposite not think that the north did not exist until they took office.


Mr. Charlion:: Nobody would have known it.


Erik Nielsen: I think the hon. member would wish to be fair. I gave to the previous administration large gobs of credit-more than I think it was warranted-in connection with planning.


An hon. Member:: He was not listening.


Chesley William Carter: The people who live in the north are Canadians, as are the people who live in other parts of Canada, and they have every right to be provided with the public facilities and social amenities that are enjoyed by other Canadian citizens. In so far as industrial exploration is going on, that too is all to the good. But when it comes to industrial development of the north, my hon. friend should know that the north suffers from the same handicaps from which we suffer in the maritimes. One of those handicaps is the high cost of living. The cost of living must be high because we are so far away
Supply-Northern Affairs from distribution centres. Because we are far away from distribution centres we are also far away from markets.
If the industrial development of the north is going to be done by private enterprise, my hon. friend must know that nearness to markets will be one of the most important factors that will be taken into consideration. As long as a product can be manufactured in a locality where it can be done more cheaply and with lower transportation costs, and therefore can be marketed at a cheaper price, these developments are going to take precedence over development of the north. That is just pure economic realism. That is the difference between the party which I represent and the government supporters. We wish to be realistic about the matter. We do not wish to create any great fantasies in people's minds. We wish to tell them the plain facts and let them use their own common sense.
I wish to congratulate the minister on his promotion to the treasury benches. I also wish to compliment him on the way he has introduced his estimates. The minister's department does not touch my constituency very closely. In my riding we have a few Indians, but they are fully integrated and are not in receipt of any special benefits from any government department. I think the service from which my riding derives the most benefit is the roads to resources program. I wish to commend the government for instituting that program. It has been extremely beneficial to my province and to my own riding. I hope that program will be continued and extended.
Historic sites come under the minister's department. I should like to remind him that since we have had nearly 500 years of history, we have more historic sites in my province than there are in any other single province. I should like to see these historic sites preserved. At one time the French were in possession of my province and there was a French capital. There are many old sites such as the headquarters of the various people who came out with charters to colonize the country. In all these places there are sites which should be preserved.
In my own riding there is an old lighthouse which has been dismantled and which I think perhaps is doomed to fall down or be taken down unless something is done about it. Personally I should like to appeal to the minister to have this lighthouse preserved. It is not only a relic of an old structure; it is also a famous landmark. A diagram of it was printed on all the mariners' charts right up to the time of confederation. Whether that has been done since confederation I am not in a position to say. However, it is an historic

Supply-Northern Affairs site. It is located at Rose Blanche in my riding. It is a very famous landmark, easily recognized from the sea, and a great help to mariners in identifying their landfalls. It has a double purpose. In that respect it is utilitarian, as well as historic. I hope the minister will look into this matter and do something to enable this old structure to be preserved.
My main reason for rising today is to bring to the minister's attention the situation with regard to seals and whales. We commonly refer to a seal fishery and a whale fishery, but as everybody knows they are animals and not fish. Therefore I presume they come under the minister's department.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, I think I should point out to the hon. member that they actually come under the Department of Fisheries. Even though they may be classified as animals and mammals, they are dealt with by the Department of Fisheries.


Chesley William Carter: I thank the minister for that information. The reason I raise this point now is that, I suppose quite wrongly, I was under the impression that a few days ago the minister replied to a question put by the hon. member for Kootenay West, or an hon. member on this side of the house, about the seal fishery. I thought the minister replied to that question and I inferred that these matters came under his department.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: At that time I referred the question to the Minister of Fisheries, who has since dealt with the matter in the house.


Chesley William Carter: Thank you very much. In that case I will reserve my remarks on this subject until we come to the proper item.


Mr. Coates:: Mr. Chairman, my remarks at this time will be associated in the main with the tourist industry aspect of the department. In this regard may I join the many hon. members who have spoken previously in praise of the efficiency of the Canadian travel bureau and the energetic head of this bureau, Mr. Alan Field.
I should like to quote a few passages from the annual proceedings of the Canadian tourist association at its convention of 1960. In this publication the association brings to everyone's attention the fact that Canada is still showing a deficit in our tourist trade with our neighbour to the south. The association also points to the fact that this deficit continues to be quite substantial and that every effort must be made to reduce this deficit as much as possible. On page 2 of the convention proceedings the association points out that travel expenditures by United States citizens outside the United States have increased by more than 300 per cent in the


past decade, and that Canada has unfortunately been able to attract only 23 per cent of this business.
After having attended meetings of the mines, forests and waters committee for two years, before which officials of the Canadian tourist association and others interested in the tourist industry in Canada have appeared, I know that a great many things have been accomplished by this government in an effort to attract greater numbers of United States citizens to Canada. One particular accomplishment was the erecting of a sign, "Great White Way", in New York City last summer. I would appreciate hearing the minister's comments on what the government feels has been accomplished through this unique effort in endeavouring to attract tourists from that area to Canada.
The Atlantic area is tremendously interested in new ways and means of attracting tourists to Canada, and especially to our particular area. The tourist industry is big business in the maritimes, and I feel it is one area where we can give leadership, and have already given leadership, to the rest of Canada in our methods of attracting tourists. In this regard the Atlantic provinces tourist bureaux have worked very closely with the Canadian travel bureau, and I feel they have accomplished a great deal in this matter of attracting tourists. I feel that tourist accommodation facilities in the Atlantic area are second to none in Canada. I am quite certain that the tremendous number of repeat visits by tourists is an indication of the high class accommodation that is available to them in this area. In my province of Nova Scotia this has, in part at least, been the result of the very progressive program initiated by the provincial government in assisting tourist operators to provide the necessary plant and accommodation facilities for those who visit our area.
Mr. Chairman, may I 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.
Robert Carman Coates: At one o'clock I was bringing to the attention of the committee the very progressive nature of the legislation which has been made available to the tourist industry in Nova Scotia and showing how this legislation had assisted to a large extent in making Nova Scotia one of the leaders in Canada in the type of accommodations which are available to tourists. This does not mean that Nova Scotia is satisfied that the accommodations available are the best that can

be made available. Indeed, in the field of restaurant operations there is still much that can be done and I am sure all restaurant operators not only in Nova Scotia but throughout Canada will be very pleased with the provisions of the Small Business Loans Act and the benefits which will accrue to them as a result of the facilities provided by this act.
Earlier in this debate we heard the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo express his opinion of the action which this government has taken through the department of northern affairs. In effect, the hon. member said we were doing no more than was done by the former Liberal administration. My own opinion is that many people in Canada will find a great many holes to pick in that argument. Certainly in my own province the roads to resources program put into effect by this administration has proved a boon to the provincial government in providing highway facilities in areas which otherwise would not be able to receive those benefits.
To bring matters closer to home, in my own constituency of Cumberland the roads to resources program has been of great assistance to the provincial government in the construction of two highways. One of them, known as the Tidnish shore road, is just about complete at the present time and makes available to tourists some 20 miles of the most beautiful salt water beaches in Canada. When completed this highway will cost approximately $1,100,000 half of which will be paid by this government through the department of northern affairs. To say that this is no more than was done prior to 1957 is just being unrealistic and such a statement is not justified by the facts.
This is not the only important road in my constituency. There is another highway known as the Parrsboro shore road. As a result of the roads to resources program the provincial government has been able to undertake the reconstruction of this road and its eventual paving at an estimated cost of close to $600,000. This will be of tremendous benefit to the people of the town of Parrsboro and to those who live along the Parrsboro shore. This is an outstanding piece of highway from a scenic point of view. It has been called by many in our area the little Cabot trail because the type of scenery along this shore line is very similar to that found in Cape Breton. No doubt, when this road is completed, there will be a tremendous influx of tourists into the region. These are tourists who apparently would never be as willing to travel along this beautiful highway from Diligent River, to Port Gerville to Ward's Brook, to Advocate Harbour and Apple River, if it were not for the fact that it were paved. This
Supply-Northern Affairs represents the type of thinking, now prevalent in this department, which results in tremendous benefits to every individual in Canada.
Along the same line, we could consider park sites and picnic and camping grounds which are now available to tourists of the type that, until this government put into effect this type of legislation, could not come to Canada because of the lack of money necessary for accommodation in motels or hotels. The popularity of this legislation is indicated by the tremendous use being made of these facilities. We still do not have enough of this type of facility, but one should consider how few we would have if we had gone along as the former Liberal administration did until 1957. Certainly the provinces could not have done this on their own or, if they had, could not have done it to the same extent. In my own constituency, as in other constituencies in Nova Scotia and the rest of Canada, there are a greater number of facilities available which attract tourists and perhaps induce them to stay longer. In this respect the government should be complimented highly for its progressive thinking.
There is in my opinion the need for a second national park on the mainland of Nova Scotia. Cape Breton has probably as beautiful a park as exists in the Dominion of Canada. It is a park with tremendous facilities, in respect of which this government has done a tremendous amount of work. This park attracts and is attracting a great number of tourists who come to Nova Scotia. It is my feeling, however, that mainland Nova Scotia has areas which would be very attractive to tourists. Certainly I would not want to prevent anyone from going to Cape Breton and witnessing the grandeur of the Margaree valley and the Cabot Trail. These places are beautiful beyond compare. I feel everyone who goes to Nova Scotia should certainly make an effort to visit Cape Breton to take in the scenic wonders. However, I do feel that there is room for another national park in Nova Scotia and would suggest that there is an area in my own constituency which would lend itself to this type of development. I would suggest the department give consideration to the establishment of such a park in the Wentworth-Westchester area of Cumberland. This area has many of the features one would look for in the establishment of a national park, and I would recommend it to the minister for consideration.
I might point out that there have been camp sites and picnic grounds established there during the past year which have been of tremendous value to tourists, for which the federal government can assume at least part of the credit. There was a very fine motel

Supply-Northern Affairs
established there recently. It was built partially through assistance under the legislation made available under the Stanfield government. In this area we have the very finest skiing accommodation available in Nova Scotia. The eastern part of Canada has a very short summer tourist season and I feel consideration should be given to the possibility of developing tourist attractions during the winter months. I feel that the Wentworth skiing area should be enlarged. If this area were made part of a national park this could be done with a good deal of benefit resulting to everyone in Nova Scotia who is interested in skiing. Since the government has indicated its interest in the physical fitness of our people, I would suggest that there is no better way of providing outdoor recreational facilities than by developing skiing areas.
I would point out that in Nova Scotia, as in many areas in Canada, particularly the smaller communities, no facilities exist for our younger and older citizens to partake in outdoor physical fitness programs except, perhaps, in hunting, fishing and hiking. It may be that the government in considering the different proposals put forward will be willing to give consideration to the establishment of an act under which moneys could be made available to these areas to assist in the construction of recreational centres.
In my home town of Amherst there exists an armoury and a beautiful new arena. In these two buildings there is room for many recreational activities. Many towns in my constituency have neither an armoury nor an arena and, if we could assist these communities in the construction of some sort of auditorium where recreational activities could be carried out, it would be of great benefit to the physical fitness of our citizens.
I would like to add at this time that the citizens of Nova Scotia have benefited from the programs of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources since 1957. Prior to that time I am sure many citizens were hardly even aware that such a department was in existence. As a result of the establishment of the roads to resources program and the camping ground-picnic site program we have witnessed a tremendous difference in the interest and feeling of our citizens toward this department. I am sure that the present minister, as the former minister, will do everything he possibly can to assist those areas of Canada in taking advantage of their national resources.
Last evening the hon. member for Port Arthur made some comments about the minister to the effect that he was disappointed, and that the minister had been long enough in this position to indicate how aggressive he was and where he was going to take this

department. Usually the hon. member for Port Arthur is fairly responsible when speaking in this house, but on this particular occasion I would say that he allowed his tongue to carry him somewhat away in expressing his regrets over the ability of the present Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources.
I think it would be very irresponsible of the minister were he, after a few months, to start making grandiose statements about what he is going to do as the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. I think he is being most responsible in assessing what can be done, how best it can be done, and doing so in a workmanlike manner. I think the hon. member for Port Arthur will find that it would be difficult indeed to find a more aggressive individual than the present Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. Let us give him a little time to prove this and not knock him before he has had a real chance to prove his ability. Thank you very much.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I apologize for disturbing the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys in his afternoon nap. I will also find it somewhat difficult to speak because when I look a little to my right and up I am reminded of the gargoyles on Westminster Abbey. However, I want to devote a few minutes to these very important estimates. I see I have stirred up an hon. gentleman over there-


Mr. Comiois:: The hon. gentleman is quite wrong. My eyes were closed, but I was listening to the very impressive speech of the former speaker.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I apologize most sincerely if I thought the hon. gentleman was asleep.


Mr. More:: The hon. member just thought he was being smart.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I have started off by stirring up some people and I must say the chamber is somewhat more alert now than it was a few minutes ago; therefore I have accomplished something in that respect. But I do wiant to say a few words on these very important estimates. They range over a very wide field and affect the lives of a large number of Canadians who live in a way different from that of the majority of us. The administration required in the area which concerns most of those people is somewhat different from the normal administration of a department, and I am quite sure it tests the ability of the administrators because of the different circumstances and the different conditions under which some sections of this department operate.
I suppose it is only fitting and proper that I should congratulate the minister on his appointment, although I do so with a degree

of envy because I have been in the British Columbia legislature and this house for 20 years. I am just as close to becoming a cabinet minister now as I was when I started.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am very glad I have some agreement on one point, anyway.
I think everyone realizes that the minister comes from a family with an excellent record of public service in the district in which he lives. He has distinguished academic achievements and his record of public service in the welfare council and the Legion and as a university teacher is well known. He had a very distinguished and courageous record during the war period, which we all recognize. Some people think the minister is modest but, you know, he is well able to blow his own horn because I have stood on the street corner and heard him do it. In the very best sense of the word, he is a good musician and I hope he plays in the orchestra of parliament to some public advantage in the days ahead. For some 10 years the minister was a conscientious and industrious private member of this house. With his appointment as minister in charge of this department he faces the test as to his ability as an administrator and, we trust, a creator in so far as policy is concerned and as an innovator because I think a person with these qualities is required in a department of this kind. We hope the minister accepts the challenge that his present position offers him and as the years go by demonstrates his continuing courage in facing new and difficult situations and his understanding of the requirements of the moment.
I wish to make a few comments. Does the member wish to say something?


Mr. Drysdale:: We are still waiting for the hon. member to say something.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I shall get to the point. We shall take full advantage of the estimates of the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys to let him realize that his estimates are of great importance in this house.


John Andrew W. Drysdale: Try to deal with these, first.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I shall want to get his views on the export of power in the future.


Mr. Comtois:: We should like to get the hon. member's.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: They have already been stated publicly. I want to say a word or two about the resources for tomorrow conference, which we all support and of which we are very glad to see this minister in charge. We are happy that he has found time to promote it. However, I do want to complement the remarks made by the hon. member for Port
Supply-Northern Affairs Arthur by saying that every opportunity should be given to all sections of the community to make a contribution to this conference by invitation, and this includes labour and some other sections of the community that have not been invited to date. I know it may appear that a conference such as this may become, shall I say, too cumbersome and top-heavy, but I think every opportunity should be given for wide spread participation and women's organizations should be given an invitation to attend this conference if only as observers because it is a conference that will decide matters of importance to the country as a whole.
I wish to say a word or two about the travel bureau and our tourist industry. Recently I read an article in a paper entitled "Canada's Ailing Tourist Industry; Can It Be Cured?" I think we all agree that during recent years the tourist industry has been somewhat of a disappointment; that Canadians have been spending more abroad, particularly since 1957, than United States tourists and others have been spending in Canada. I am not going to blame the government entirely for that; it is a reflection of economic conditions in the United States as well as here, but I do suggest that some serious consideration will have to be given to this subject and to increasing, shall I say, the tempo of Canadian appeal abroad. I noticed recently that Premier Bennett provided a haven for one of his former ministers, the former minister of agriculture, as tourist publicity representative in San Francisco. He was a very successful salesman of Carnation milk prior to being minister, and I hope he is just as successful in selling British Columbia as a place for tourists to visit. In this connection, I simply want to conclude my remarks on this point by suggesting that the Kootenays are often overlooked in the advertising which the minister's department directs to tourists. Mention is made of the coastal areas and the Okanagan, but I think the minister will find I am correct when I say there is much less reference to the beauties of the Kootenays. I should like him to take action to correct this situation because my constituents who are interested in the tourist industry have made this complaint for a number of years.
While I am on my feet, I should like to say a word or two about the historic sites and monuments board. The hon. member who spoke before me made a reference to it, and I intended to make a reference to the subject when the particular item was under discussion. However, I might as well do so now. I am sure the minister is interested in assisting in the preservation of historic sites

Supply-Northern Affairs and monuments that are worth while and to which the federal government can properly make a contribution.
I want to bring to the attention of the committee the excellent work that has been done by the Kootenay historical society in the preservation of the steamship Moyie at Kaslo, B.C. This is the last of the stern-wheelers that have plied the lakes of the interior since 1884. The residents of Kaslo have gone out of their way to do what they could to bring this vessel ashore, place it on a foundation and make a museum out of its interior. Their efforts have been rewarded by an increasing number of tourists who want to see one of these vessels that sailed the lakes for so many years. The residents of this area have received assitance from the federal government, and quite recently they applied for some further assistance. I merely mention this in the hope the minister will give further consideration to their pleas for the further assistance necessary in completing the preservation of this vessel and its caretaking in the future.
I should like now to say a few words with respect to the concern of the rod and gun clubs of the interior over the possible developments on the Columbia and the effect of these dams on fishing in the area. This has been a subject of considerable discussion. Quite recently I might say all the rod and gun clubs of the interior met at a conference in Vernon. These clubs represent 3,200 members and they unanimously expressed their opposition to the building of the high Arrow dam. They have also given very careful consideration to the effect of these dams, should they be constructed, upon the fish and wildlife of the area.
This resolution was adopted by the West Kootenay rod and gun clubs association, by the interior rod and gun clubs association and by the B.C. rod and gun clubs association. I read it because these men have had a number of committees working which, with the co-operation of the game branch of British Columbia, have been studying the impact of this flooding upon wildlife and fishing. This is the resolution:
Whereas the impact on wildlife of Kootenay river and Columbia river development of power and storage dams will be tremendous and the adequate correction of the problems created will be much beyond the financial ability of the fish and game branch of the department of recreation and conservation of the government of British Columbia,
Therefore be it resolved (1) that a complete and detailed biological survey be carried out jointly by the Canadian wildlife service and the fish and game branch, B. C. department of recreation and conservation, to determine the ecological effect on wildlife of each and all proposed power and storage dams, the report of such survey to be publicly available; (2) that anticipated problems in wildlife management as indicated in the

survey be planned for, rectified, and financed as part of said developments; (3) that a definite proportion of the value of the power produced be set aside and other benefits such as navigation, irrigation, etc. (including downstream benefits) produced from said developments for wildlife management and recreational facilities in the Kootenay and Columbia river basins in Canada.
We realize that this study cannot be undertaken without co-operation between federal and provincial agencies. I do urge the minister to give consideration to this problem because it is of great concern to a large number of persons interested in preserving wildlife and fish in the southeastern portion of British Columbia.
I should like to refer briefly to an answer the minister gave in reply to one of my questions some days ago with regard to the Arctic islands. I had mentioned that Commander Low planted the flag on Ellesmere island and took possession of that island and the islands of the north in the name of the Dominion of Canada. The minister indicated that my knowledge of history was somewhat inaccurate and that this taking possession had somehow been accomplished before. In order to refresh the minister's memory, I should like to read to him the terms of reference given to Commander Low:
The expedition had three objectives:
(1)	to establish the Royal Northwest Mounted Police (R.C.M.P.) as the law and order agency in the eastern Arctic;
(2)	to take formal possession of all the Arctic islands in the name of King Edward VII and the Dominion of Canada;
(3)	to gather information on the health of the Eskimos, the geology, botany and other resources, and produce topographical surveys of the areas visited.
Then, there are more detailed instructions given. However, according to my reading of Canadian history and a searching of the record, I find that is the first occasion on which, under instructions of the federal government, the commander or an expedition took formal possession of all the Arctic islands in the name of Canada. If I am wrong I wish the minister would let the committee have the source of his information because, in a very moderate manner, he corrected my statement the other day.


John Andrew W. Drysdale: Will the hon. member indicate the document from which he is reading?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Yes, it is an extract from the book "The Neptune" which was written in connection with the voyage of the Neptune.
I should like to refer to another matter. In Hansard of July 6, 1956, page 5691, I outlined the part Dr. L. E. Borden, who is a personal friend of mine now resident in Victoria and a relative of the late Sir Robert

Borden, had played in establishing our claim to the Arctic islands. Then, on August 11, 1956, I had the honour, on Dr. Borden's behalf, of presenting to the house an original proclamation taking possession of Ellesmere land and all the adjacent islands. This important document is now in the archives bound in red leather, if any of the newcomers to the house wish to see evidence of this proclamation, they will find it there.
Mrs. Borden wrote an article in the Canadian Geographical Journal entitled "Northward 1903-04". Since this article appeared a further development of the utmost importance has occurred. I am sure hon. members are all aware of the contribution that Vilhjalmur Stefansson, consultant, polar studies program at Dartmouth college, Hanover, New Hampshire, has made in relation to scientific work in the polar regions. Upon reading Mrs. Borden's article, he wrote her the first thing next morning because of his book "Cancer, Disease of Civilization?" published in 1960. I quote:
This was the first cancer search among the northern Canadian Eskimo ever formally directed by the Canadian (or any North American) government.
He has written to mention this matter because at the time and since then Dr. Borden never received credit for undertaking the first cancer research with respect to the Eskimos and making a report on that research to the government of Canada, which research has been confirmed by the later experience of the department of national health and this government. In fairness to this unusual work done by Dr. Borden at that time I want to quote briefly from two letters from Dr. Stefansson. He writes as follows to Mrs. Borden on February 5, 1961:
Your letter of 31 January is both a relief and depressing. When I read your "Northward 1903-04" I had a sinking feeling that I had failed to give due credit to Dr. Borden for an Eskimo cancer search on the Neptune and now I am, though absolved of personal guilt by your letter, nevertheless depressed by the story which is sad news that accidentally, through parsimony, or deliberately, his scientific work, and that of others, was lost or suppressed. If published with the rest of the Neptune report in 1906 then Dr. Borden, Commander Low, and the Canadian government might have had the credit for an important pioneer research on the incidence of cancer-and I am sure his cancer report, which your letter summarizes, cannot have been the only notable thing that would have been established by the publication of his findings.
Then he goes on to say this:
Monday I shall be sending to you an inscribed copy of "Cancer: Disease of Civilization?" You will find that in this title the "?" is meant to be conspicuous, and you will see how consonant Dr. Borden's findings are with the rest of the Eskimo testimonies, all the way from southwestern Alaska to southeastern and northeastern Canada, and how well Dr. Borden deserves to have his name at the head of the list-if only I had known enough to place it there!
90205-6-246
Supply-Northern Affairs
The letter is signed by Dr. Stefansson. 1 make this reference because I think it is only fair. As I said on July 6, 1956, the accomplishments of this expedition have largely been buried, lost sight of and forgotten. Here I have further evidence of the good work undertaken by this expedition, first of all in claiming the Arctic islands on behalf of Canada, second in surveys and third in botanical research. Dr. Borden produced the first botanical survey of the Arctic islands. Now we have proof that he was the first one to write a report on cancer research with respect to the Eskimos on the North American continent.
I bring this matter to the minister's attention because I think it is only fitting and proper that a gentleman of these accomplishments, who is still living in Victoria, should be recognized and his work brought to the attention of the House of Commons and the country.
(Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I wish that the minister would suggest to the historic sites and monuments board of Canada that they put up a monument on the grounds of the College de l'Assomption, or a memorial plaque on the century-old part of the building, in memory of Sir Wilfrid Laurier who was a student there.
Sir Wilfrid Laurier was of the 22nd promotion. He entered the college in 1854 and left it in 1860.
Founded in 1833 by the Rev. Frangois Labelle, parish priest, and by doctors J. B. Meilleur and J. C. Cazeneuve, the College de l'Assomption has given the church and the state many prominent figures, such as Sir Wilfrid Laurier, one of its most renowned former pupils, Sir Louis-Amable Jette, lieutenant-governor, and, among members of the clergy-let me mention only a few-Msgr. Charlebois, Msgr. Lamarche and the present superior, Msgr. Langlois, P.D.
May I quote from the records of the College de l'Assomption, in which I find the following:
After the general election of 1900,... the superior of the college sent a telegram of congratulations to Sir Wilfrid Laurier. Obviously the latter was very pleased and he answered without delay-
I have here a photostat of the letter he wrote:
Ottawa, November 10th, 1900
Dear Mr. Villeneuve,
Among all the congratulations I have received on the results of the general election, none pleased me more than the ones coming from my alma mater. I am always proud of having been a student at the College de l'Assomption.
Yours truly,
Sir Wilfrid Laurier.

Supply*-Northern Affairs
I feel therefore that a monument, or else a plaque affixed to the hundred-year old section of the College de l'Assomption would remind the people of L'Assomption, and the country as a whole, that Sir Wilfrid Lau-rier was educated at that college.
I express that request with the conviction that it will be taken into serious consideration by the historic sites and monuments board of Canada.
I wish now to refer to a series of questions which I put to the present Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources concerning Eskimo school children of northern Quebec and of other areas in the north. He answered among other things:
-English is the language of instruction in the schools established by the department of northern affairs for Eskimos generally. This has been the practice in northern Quebec as well as the Northwest Territories since the first departmental school was established in 1949.
Mr. Chairman, may I add that that situation was created and has existed since 1949, in other words, under the Liberal administration of which the member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier), as minister of transport, was a member, as was the present premier of Quebec Mr. Jean Lesage, as minister of northern affairs and national resources and who was therefore chiefly responsible for that situation. I wanted to remind the house that such was the kind of vision he had at that time.
Those are the only comments I had to make. (Text):


Mr. Granger:: As a member from one of the great northern territories-in as much as my district includes Labrador, it is needless to say that I am greatly interested in the estimates of this department. I should like to begin by congratulating the minister on his appointment. As time goes on I trust that he will not forget the vision because, as I have said before in this chamber, far from deriding the vision I agree wholeheartedly with the scriptures where it is written, "Where there is no vision the people perish". As a matter of fact, the record of history shows htat almost every great endeavour could never have been carried through to fruition without vision and the courage and faith which must accompany it. When any new thing is started it must be done, by virtue of its newness, with inadequate knowledge and insufficient evidence. Vision therefore is of tremendous importance.
Northern development is important to Canada. Vast as is our territory, our population basically is strung out on a ribbon along the southern border. If we are to develop

into the really great and powerful nation which we can and which I am sure we will become, it is necessary to keep northern development always to the fore.
With regard to the authorship of the vision,
I agree with the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo, who pointed out that northern development had its roots in the previous Liberal administration. In so far as the vision which began some years ago is carried on and augmented, it must receive our support.
Perhaps I may be forgiven if I again refer to holy writ with respect to the youthfulness of the present Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. I think of a text which in my mind couples him with the hon. member for Kootenay West. The text is, "Your young men shall see visions and your old men shall dream dreams".
My criticism of the vision is that it has not been broad enough. The vision of the present administration has been too narrow in its beam. It has been a northwest vision, rather than a really broad northern vision.
I make of the new minister the request which I made of his predecessor, that he beam northern development broader so as to include Labrador to a greater extent. Nowadays Labrador is very much in the news and I need not remind hon. members of the vast developments which are taking place there at Carol lake, lake Wabush, the Twin Falls power development, and so on. However, these developments are largely a result of provincial vision and the foresightedness of Premier Smallwood.
Labrador is a great part of the north and its wealth is now beginning to be recognized. I would ask the minister to take into serious consideration the possibility of building federal roads and airstrips in that great territory, which eventually will be recognized as a veritable treasure house of Canada. Before it can properly be developed and before its tremendous potential in respect to the tourist industry can be developed, a number of airstrips and roads must be built. We must build a road around the coast and a road linking the interior with the north shore of the gulf of St. Lawrence.
With respect to the Eskimos who live in Labrador, as hon. members know Eskimo affairs in Labrador are administered by the provincial government with assistance from the federal government.
I should like to request that the federal government give the same per capita assistance to Labrador Eskimos as it gives to Quebec Eskimos. According to figures tabled in the house, the Quebec Eskimo receives federal assistance to the extent of $400 per person. I think that when the sum total of federal

assistance to the Eskimo in Labrador is taken into account it will be found that he receives much less; perhaps less than $250 per person.
This is something to which I ask the minister to give very sympathetic attention and, if possible, as soon as practicable make available to the government of Newfoundland financial assistance for the Eskimos of Labrador to the same degree as that assistance is made available to the Eskimos of Quebec.
I hope, of course, that Indians will receive the same treatment as Eskimos. While on the subject of Eskimos I should like to pay a tribute to the missionaries of all faiths who are carrying on great work amongst the Eskimos and Indians of Labrador. Their dedication, self-sacrifice and invaluable work in connection with these people is very great indeed. There is really no way of measuring its great worth.
I should like to bring to the attention of the minister something which I mentioned last year. I refer to the desirability of having a monument erected to the last of the Beothics, the original inhabitants of Newfoundland. The last Beothic was Mary March, and I believe her place of burial is known. It occurred to me that perhaps we could erect a monument in the Terra Nova national park to the last of that tragic race. I think that would be appropriate. It would be a token of remembrance to a race of original Canadians which has completely disappeared.
There is another matter which has been brought to my attention by my constituents in Gander, the desirability of a golf course in the Terra Nova national park. The Terra Nova national park is in the constituency of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate. His riding and mine are adjoining. The people of Gander are very interested in a golf course for the Terra Nova national park. Perhaps it is not quite fair for me to ask for a golf course in the Terra Nova national park especially for the benefit of my constituents in Gander, but I think a golf course in the Terra Nova national park would be a considerable attraction to tourists. I hope the minister will keep this in mind.
I would also ask the minister to keep in mind the question of the road to Eastport through the national park. I think a survey was carried out in connection with this road. I hope the survey will be completed in time for the road to be built perhaps late this year as a part of a winter works program. This road is used extensively by my constituents as well as those of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate.
Another matter I should like to mention is the general encouragement of tourists to visit Newfoundland and Labrador and the 90205-6-246J
Supply-Northern Affairs possibility of extending existing steamship services and adapting one of them for the use of tourists in Labrador.
Labrador is a great and unknown territory. I am justly proud of it and I think more people should have the opportunity of seeing it. Gander itself is a logical place for a centre of tourism, and a ski-run would probably encourage tourists to come to central Newfoundland and would make it more attractive to them.
To return for a moment to the question of Labrador, as I said earlier it is not only a treasure house of the north, or a treasure house of the province of Newfoundland, but it is a treasure house of Canada. I should like to repeat that there is a great need for opening up this vast territory, which to some extent is one of the last unknown and unspoiled areas in the world. Certainly it is to the advantage of Canada as a nation to have Labrador opened up by road and air through the building of airstrips. I think this work should be begun as quickly as possible, particularly the building of airstrips, followed by the building of federal roads.
I am sure it would be a sound investment and an investment which would pay off literally in dollars and cents over the years. It would be a great Canadian project which would be good for Canada as well as for Labrador. I hope the minister will consider this, though it is admittedly a big item, in the light of what northern development really is, a huge undertaking challenging the imagination and requiring courageous action.


Mr. Bigg:: It is always a great privilege to stand in this chamber and speak a few words, but this is particularly the case when we are able to congratulate a new and young minister. We in the party perhaps know better than most, the hon. gentleman who now holds office as Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, and we have every hope that he will bring new lustre to the vision. Far from the vision not being broad enough I am sure it is only a matter of getting enough appropriation to carry out the plan which he and his ministry have in mind for the development of the north country.
I also represent a great frontier constituency in northwestern Alberta and our main problem up there is transportation. Perhaps unfortunately, our whole district is within the provincial boundaries and for this reason neither the new minister nor his department can take the initiative in providing roads to resources. This is probably not too well understood, but I want to put it on record because it is the case; it is only where a province makes overtures to the dominion government that we are able to assist them in building roads in

Supply-Northern Affairs the province. The district of which I am speaking is some 60,000 square miles in extent and in the northern half roads are almost non-existent. Transportation is essential to any orderly development of the north country. The most important object of building a good road is, of course, to reduce freight rates into the north country. Without such reduction the rate of development is bound to slow down. I know that every co-operation will be given when the provincial authorities seek to put in a road, preferably an allweather road, to serve the district surrounding McMurray.
The resources in the north have not been touched. In my opinion there are several parts of this region which should be opened up, areas closer than the far reaches of the Canadian shield. I refer to Wood Buffalo park and the Thelon game reserve. At present we are unable to prospect for minerals in that part of the country. It may have been in order at one time to restrict prospecting for minerals in the parks but I think that is unnecessary in Wood Buffalo park. It is a very extensive area and the usual reasons for not prospecting-interference with the beauty of the park or with wildlife-do not apply in this case because the 15,000 or 20,000 buffalo that have their habitat in this park do not live in the area where the prospecting would be done.
We have opened up the park for the clearance of timber. This was instituted under the former administration and I do not intend to go into that question at the present time, but I must say I was not happy at all about the methods used to take this timber out. I understand the timber is over aged. If it can be taken out for the good of the economy and for the good of the park, I see no reason why the minerals should not be prospected for and removed as long as this does not interfere with the natural beauty of the park or the safety and security of the animals.
The Clearwater river area is also very rich in natural resources especially those likely to prove of benefit to the tourist industry. Some of the finest big game hunting in the world can be found in there; some of the finest tro-phys, the antlers from elk, moose and deer, have come out of the Clearwater river area. But, again, we cannot go into this area without a proper road. I cannot sufficiently emphasize the necessity of pressing for a suitable all-weather road into the McMurray area and I look to this ministry to give every cooperation to the provincial authorities when they are ready to take this initiative.
I should like to congratulate the department for assisting in providing picnic shelters along the various roads of Canada. Wherever you go you see these fine facilities. I do not think the part which the federal government has

played in providing the shelters is sufficiently well known and I want to take this opportunity to express my personal thanks. I have used them often myself, and I know they are much appreciated.
I think a larger appropriation should be granted in respect of our national parks so that more employment might be provided for our high school and university students, these fine young boys and girls who are seeking to continue their education and improve their capacities. These young people are going to provide the most valuable natural resource we have in this whole Dominion of Canada and I should like to see a much larger appropriation made in respect of our national parks to provide jobs for as many of them as we possibly can.
I should also like to ask the minister if he can explain the reason for having the R.C.M.P. member dropped from the Northwest Territories Council. As an ex-member of the force I can speak with some knowledge of this matter. It may be misunderstood throughout the ranks of the serving members of the force why a senior officer should not sit on this council, because the prestige of the force, as every Canadian knows, is of paramount importance in the north country. I should like it to be made as clear as possible why this official is no longer required or needed on this council. This is a personal matter and not intended as criticism but as a personal observation.
May I say I would not be in favour of the withdrawal of mounted police detachments from outlying posts in the north country. I know that every young member of the mounted police wishes at one time or another to serve in the north. He wants to be on detachment duty. He wants to have the responsibility for getting to know the natives and of establishing that very special and responsible relationship with the natives which has been traditionally part of R.C.M.P. fife and work in those areas in the past. If there is any thought of bringing in outlying detachments and centralizing them in any southern posts, it is my opinion that it will not work. It will not work as far as the morale of the mounted police is concerned and I do not think it will work as far as the natives themselves are concerned. It takes years to get to know these people and you cannot get to know them sitting in Fort Smith or Frobisher Bay. One must mingle with the natives and understand their thinking to be of any use at all to them in standing between the native's way of life and the doubtful advantages of the white man's civilization.
The minister has just returned from the north country and I know that he will now

be in a much better position to make decisions in that regard. I think it is very dangerous for someone to sit in Ottawa and make decisions without going first into the Arctic to acquire an understanding of the situation there. I think very careful planning and consideration of the many human resources which exist in the north country must take place before this vision can be successful, as every Canadian hopes it will be.


Mr. Baldwin:: Mr. Chairman, if the hon. member for Port Arthur is not yet dejected and sorry because of the harsh strictures which he passed with regard to the minister, possibly I can say a few more words which will cause him to understand the situation.
The northern affairs and national resources portfolio is a difficult one. With deference, it is my submission that it is not possible for any one man to place himself in possession of all the facts regarding the various projects which are normally attended to in this department, as well as the special projects, one of which was mentioned by the hon. member. I refer, of course, to the resources for tomorrow conference. I would suggest this is a department of government which is tremendously important and complex, and will require very considerable time and effort to master. I am sure the hon. member for Port Arthur will not mind my saying that sometimes we feel that his party considers that achievements are measured by the mileage of speeches, and success, by the amount of noise and confusion. I say quite sincerely to the hon. member that the present position to which his party has now descended is a good criterion that this is not the way to gain the esteem of the people of Canada.
The hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rose-mont took it upon himself yesterday to deliver the usual strictures and jeers with regard to the northern development program of this government. I would suggest this stems from the attitude on the part of hon. members of the official opposition, and is recognition of their dismal failure to do those things they should have done which are so important to have been done at the proper time which was, I suggest, while that party was in office.
I have been living in the north for almost one third of a century. I include my own district of Peace River in the north. I do not believe that these developments will take place suddenly and with great rapidity but that we must establish a foundation and move from one position to another. This is precisely what the present government is doing. I have driven along the Mackenzie highway which, during the course of last year, was extended to Yellowknife, and have seen dozens of cars
Supply-Northern Affairs carrying tourists looking for a land of opportunity with the feeling that somewhere in the north there is that area where they can find themselves in a life different from that to which they have been accustomed. It is the bettering of the means of transportation that will lead to this particular achievement.
The hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rose-mont tried to disparage this government's achievement while, at the same time, tried to horn in on those achievements by stating that they stemmed from the efforts of the previous government. In support of that contention he cited certain statements which had been made by Mr. Lesage when he was the minister of northern affairs and national resources. I have read the statements made by Mr. Lesage to a parliamentary committee in 1955, as set out by the hon. member, and have come to the conclusion that they are no more than a generalization of policy. It is like saying that one is against sin and believes in motherhood, only more so. At page 7 in the English translation of the speech made by the hon. member, in Hansard of yesterday, he quotes Mr. Lesage as follows:
Mr. Chairman, I have given an outline of our policy to cope with the human problem of economic development in the north. I do not believe our plans lack imagination, vigour or aggressiveness.
That statement may be so. All they lacked was action.	*
The hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rose-mont made some mention of the Great Slave lake railway project. I would like to deal with this subject in the time remaining at my disposal.
I recall a statement made by the hon. member for Laurier when he was speaking on the resolution for the establishment of the sessional committee on railways. At that time he queried the delay on the part of this government in initiating this plan to construct this railway, which had been announced in 1958 in the speech from the throne. He was suggesting that this government was slow in consummating this project. I suggest that any delay which may have taken place in the construction of this very essential, important and vital project can be laid squarely at the door of the previous government. I have had in my possession for some time information with regard to this particular project but have not made use of it for the simple reason that so long as the royal commission established by the government to inquire into this route was in operation the matter was sub judice.
This commission was set up under terms of reference dated some time in May or June of 1959. Its deliberations were completed, to the extent that a report was forthcoming, toward the end of last session, and

Supply-Northern Affairs consequently nothing could be done last year. This year when parliament reconvened there was contained in the speech from the throne a statement to the effect that a location survey would be made of the western route. I take that statement to indicate, as I feel most individuals will, that the government has accepted the majority recommendation of that royal commission and has decided on a western route for the construction of this railway. If I have enough time left I propose to give the reasons why this is a proper decision.
The hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rose-mont made reference to a brief filed by the commissioner of the Northwest Territories with the Gordon royal commission. I read that brief and feel that it was well laid out, well buttressed by facts, statistics and information. As I read the brief, it was specifically and definitely in favour of the construction of this railroad in so far as it dealt with the establishment of a northern development program hinged on transportation. In regard to the construction of this railroad it contained recommendations that a route commencing at Grimshaw and going to Peace river should be adopted. So far as I can find out, up until two or three years ago, this is the only route that had been ever deemed acceptable.
In support of this I would refer to a document or a pamphlet-I think it is called "Canada's New North"-which was put out by the department of northern affairs in 1947, I believe, under the very capable direction of Dr. Camsell, who had a most adequate and informed knowledge of the northern situation. In this particular pamphlet reference was made to this question of the railroad to Great Slave lake. The report took cognizance of various suggestions which had been made in the past and then went on to say it repeated and accepted the fact that the only logical and proper route was the one from Grimshaw. This is the one going from the Peace river country, the western route. All others which had been considered with regard to this particular project had been found to be lacking in so far as the principles of economics and engineering are concerned. Therefore, so far as I can see, up to 1955, when this brief was filed before the Gordon commission by the commissioner of the Northwest Territories there had been no other alternative really considered seriously in so far as this rail route was concerned.
I should say this. In the last 35 years thousands of people have settled in the area from Grimshaw north on the express understanding that this railroad would be built, and that when built it would go through the territory of the Peace river country north

from Grimshaw and into the Northwest Territories and Great Slave lake, following that particular route.
During the course of the hearings of this commission it was my privilege to act as counsel for the boards of trade and the chambers of commerce of the Peace river country and to ask people who lived in that area to come forward, or their children, to give some indication as to the reasons which had prompted their settlement in this area. As a result I received hundreds of letters-in fact, I could safely say they ran into thousands-[DOT] from people who had settled, or whose fathers and mothers had settled in this area, on the specific and distinct understanding that when this railway would be built this would be the route which would be chosen. Consequently, it came as a very distinct shock when toward the latter part of 1957 or early in 1958 it became apparent to many people in our country that serious consideration had been given to another area and to another route. From what I have discovered I am satisfied that this change in planning came into existence or was considered sometime between the latter part of 1955 and the early part of 1957. I think I have ample evidence for stating this, and it is demonstrated in part by these points.
During the hearings of the Manning royal commission as to the route of the railway to Great Slave lake evidence was given by a man called Denney, of the Denney Logging Company, who stated that in 1956 when he was considering applying for timber limits in Wood Buffalo park, which is the park to which my hon. friend from Athabasca made reference, he had been told by one government official that this railroad was definitely planned to go through Wood Buffalo park, which was the eastern route. His evidence also was to the effect that there were also other government officials, probably more highly placed, who had given him some information, but when pressed on examination he refused to give those names.
I might say here, Mr. Chairman, that the man who gave this information to Denney, a man who is called, I think, Evans Essex or Essex Evans-at this time my memory fails me as to his name but he was a government official; I am told his last name was Essex- held a position of some substance in the park. In the fall of 1956 he left his position with the department of northern affairs and became manager of this United States lumber company, the Denney Logging Company. At the same hearing a pamphlet was presented consisting of maps and sketches which dealt with the future development of Forth Smith, which lies in the vicinity of the eastern route. This publication clearly established on one

particular sketch that a railway line was projected to go through Fort Smith, and showed evidence of yards and a station which were planned for Fort Smith. This document came out some time in June or July of 1957 and could only have been prepared on information gathered together and obtained over a period of many months preceding it. It clearly indicates just what government thinking had been in the months prior to the summer of 1957.
Finally-this is the third point that I shall present to the committee-although I have others-in 1957, the railway companies, obviously acting in connection with government understanding and no doubt on a decision to which the government of that day was privy, dispatched an engineer for the purpose of considering various routes, but instead of directing his attention to the route which had been the western route first planned and understood to be the one which would be chosen, this engineer directed a lot of his attention to a survey of the eastern route. For this reason, so far as I am concerned, I am satisfied beyond any reasonable doubt that the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, at that time under the administration of Mr. Lesage who has now gone on to greater rewards in the province of Quebec, decided to abandon the people of the Peace river country, forget the promises that had been made to them and, under some kind of collusive understanding with the railway companies, build this railroad along the eastern route. The result of this, of course, would have been to leave the railways to charge whatever they thought the traffic would bear.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Will the hon. member permit a question at this time? Would the hon. member be able to substantiate his allegations or his assertions with any documents or any publication from the government in office at the time?


Gerald William Baldwin: This is all strong circumstantial evidence. All of the facts of which I have spoken can be found by an examination of the transcript of the proceedings of the Manning royal commission, as to the route to Great Slave lake, which are to be found in the library. The three specific facts to which I have referred are mentioned. If the hon. member wishes, I might be able to assist him in finding them.
As I was starting to say, Mr. Chairman, my belief is that this would have been a fine thing for the railway companies and if I were a railroad man I might have said that this was the route to choose. There would be no competition and they could charge what in their opinion the traffic would bear. Again, it
Supply-Northern Affairs would have benefited one or two companies and a few individuals who stood to gain by the choice of this eastern route, but it would have left betrayed the many thousands of people who, as a result of the promises made over a period of years, had reason to expect that when this railroad was built it would be built through the Peace river country.
I mentioned something about logging operations in Wood Buffalo park to which the hon. member for Athabasca also referred. I want to make it crystal clear, Mr. Chairman, that I have no constitutional objection to what can be established as a reasonable amount of logging being done in that park according to proper logging practices. However, I do believe I am entitled to take exception to all the shenanigans that occurred with regard to this particular project.
In the first instance, the berths in respect of which this logging was undertaken were berths which were given by way of order in council following certain amendments to the National Parks Act. Two years ago, I believe it was, I had occasion to comment on that procedure in the house. I said that in my professional opinion there was very great doubt as to whether these orders in council were valid. It may well be that the departmental solicitors have given opinions to the contrary. I have been able in the past to substantiate my professional opinion, at times, against that of the departmental solicitors. Until I have been shown to the contrary it is still my feeling that there is a great cloud of uncertainty and doubt about the validity of these orders in council.
In the second place, these particular orders in council had the effect, when implemented and when certain assignments had been given, of granting to two corporations, one of which was a United States corporation which had recently come into Canada, the entire rights with respect to more than 1.5 billion board-feet of merchantable timber in this park. I believe that this amount constitutes almost the total amount of merchantable timber in the park. Now, this United States firm came in with machinery which, I am told, was not suitable for the purpose for which it was brought here. The company had difficulty in meeting its obligations and probably had some difficulty in meeting its commitments to the government.
For the life of me I cannot see why, if we are going to do any logging in our national parks, we should have to import a United States firm to do it. I feel that all this was done to lend strength and colour to the reasons assigned in justification of this eastern route. It was done in the spirit of the-public-be-damned and constituted a grave

Supply-Northern Affairs infraction not only of the spirit but the letter of the law in connection with the operation of our national parks.
Before I leave this subject may I state that the preambles to these orders in council giving reasons for the allowance of this exploitation set out that the timber in these areas was largely mature and over-mature timber. This issue came up before the Manning commission and there was filed with the commission a thesis by a man named Thorp, a gentleman who had been employed for some years in the national parks, which he had written in connection with his admission to the professional foresters' association in British Columbia. I do not have sufficient knowledge to interpret this brief but it was interpreted to the distinguished members of this commission as constituting a complete negation of that theory. In fact, the professional forester who gave evidence interpreting this thesis to the commission said that there was no larger percentage of mature and overmature timber in this park than there was in any of the other areas east of the Rocky mountains.
Probably this is all water under the bridge now, Mr. Chairman, and I am compelled to bring it up only by reason of the suggestions which have been advanced by the hon. member for Laurier and the hon. member who spoke yesterday. These hon. members were critical of the achievements for which this government has been responsible in connection with northern development. I might add that the people in my part of the country will always regard with esteem the action of the Prime Minister and this government in permitting this commission to hold hearings so that we would have an opportunity to ventilate the facts. It has always been my belief that given a just and proper case with strong evidence, and a determination to pursue it, justice usually results.
The commission has now decided, two to one, in favour of the western route. This is a good decision and I am not going into the detailed reasons for it. The report is there for all hon. members to see. The decision of the government to implement it is a wise and proper decision. Immediately after the estimates were passed in December of this year appropriating money for the surveys to be made, the machinery was set in action. Since then a great deal of work has been done. I am informed by what we in the north call moccasin telegraph that the results which have so far been achieved have been quite remarkable and more than justify the decision. Along this route adequate supplies of gravel have been found to be used as ballast. There is more than sufficient lumber from

which ties can be fashioned. It has been discovered, as we have always maintained, that there are large amounts of merchantable timber along the western route far in excess of the amount that might be found along the eastern route, even including what could be found in Wood Buffalo national park. The attention which has been directed to the Peace river area and the north generally as a result of the decision of this government has been quite remarkable.
Just the other day I received a copy of a local newspaper which indicated very substantial reserves of iron ore in the Hines Creek-Clear Hills area of the Peace river country had been found and which would more than likely be developed in the not too distant future. This was, I suggest, an indirect result of the decision of the government to proceed with this railroad. There are areas of agricultural land along this eastern route which I think constitute the last great reservoir of such lands in North America. I am satisfied, Mr. Chairman, that *when this decision is finally implemented and this railroad is completed the present population of the Peace river country, which includes part of the area inhabited by those people who live in the constituency of the hon. member for Cariboo and in the area which goes into the lower part of Mackenzie, will be augmented to not less than half a million people by 1975. This is not idle conjecture. I could pinpoint the places where communities will be established, where towns will grow, where lumber operations will flourish, where there is natural gas and petroleum. These are not pipe dreams; these are not visions. These are actual facts which have been brought to the knowledge of the people during the course of the last few years.
I wish to make one more point in connection with the building of this railway. I grant that it will help, and it is intended mainly to help, the people in the Northwest Territories. It will have an immeasurably beneficial effect on the people in my constituency. Primarily, however, the bread and butter motive for constructing the railroad is to enable the ore produced at Pine Point mine to be brought down to Trail to the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company for processing. I think we are at the stage where time is of the essence. I understand, and I am supported in this by statements which have been appearing in the press, that Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company at Trail depends to some extent for its economic production on the presence of what are known as smelter residues. These smelter residues will shortly be exhausted. It is for that reason that Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company, which holds a large interest in the Pine

Point mine, is most anxious that the railroad be completed and the minerals brought down from Pine Point to Trail. The failure to do that may well result in the company having to obtain custom ore, possibly from outside of Canada. I think that would be a great tragedy and I therefore urge the government, particularly the minister, to push ahead with this project as quickly as possible.
I recognize that we are in a difficult period in so far as railroads are concerned. However, it has been my submission, and I urged this two years ago, that this railroad should be constructed as a special railroad within the meaning of the Railway Act. It should not be compelled under the normal provisions of the Railway Act to carry passengers and to submit to the other more costly procedures which in the past went with railroad construction and operation. This is simply and purely a development railroad. It should be built with that fact in mind and it should be built as soon as possible.


Mr. Garland:: This is the first opportunity I have had to congratulate the minister on his new appointment. He is a well liked and well respected member of this House of Commons and a man of high principles. I wish him well in his new responsibilities.
I rise in my place today to say a few words about only one subject that comes under the minister's responsibility. I refer to tourism which is an important industry, of course, to Canada and of particular importance in our area. I realize that it can be said that 1961 looks to be a promising year and for this, of course, we are glad. We can refer to modest increases over the years. I have just spent some time with some of the important leaders in the tourist industry of this country who were recently brought together in North Bay, and I can assure you that all is not well in the industry. I should like to refer to one aspect only today. This is a trend which is growing successively worse with each passing year.
This aspect of tourism, this growing of the deficit in our travel account is a matter of genuine concern, I know, to the government and to all thoughtful Canadians. I should like to refer to the Bank of Canada report of 1960. At page 44 it deals with non-merchandise transactions in the balance of international payments on current account. In this respect I should like to point out that Canadians spent $215 million more in 1960 abroad than tourists spent in Canada. This is a situation that has worsened to this $215 million deficit position from a position in 1950 of a surplus on travel account of $49 million. As a matter of interest, we could go back to 1939 when there was a surplus in this account of $68 million.
90205-6-247
Supply-Northern Affairs
I am not going to lecture the minister this afternoon on the importance of tourism or remind him that today travel is the fastest expanding industry in the world or tell him that it is the second best source of United States dollars for Canada. However, I am convinced that he must persuade his colleagues that greater effort and spending will have to be made in view of this trend to which I have referred, namely this deficit in our travel account.
Canada has one of the world's lowest per tourist expenditures on tourist promotion in other countries. When we look at the facts we find that Bermuda spends $12.50 per tourist. In the countries of Europe the average spending is $9.50 per tourist. When we realize these facts, and when they are viewed in the light of this new development and in the light of world competition, they make our efforts seem quite inadequate, when we consider that this year there will be perhaps 30 million visits to this country and that the total amount of money covered in vote 303 is $2,687,000, which means less than 10 cents per visit. I am not holding this up as a comparison with the figures I have just used. I make the statement only to point out what I consider to be the inadequate approach to this whole problem that has developed in the tourist industry in this country and throughout the world.
It is a matter of genuine concern that travel expenditure by United States citizens abroad -and this matter was referred to earlier today I believe-was up 300 per cent in the last ten years and yet travel expenditures by United States citizens in Canada is only up approximately 20 odd per cent in the same period.
We must also look at the other side of the coin. Expenditures by Canadians outside of Canada are now four times greater than they were in 1948 and they are still rising. To reduce this trend is not an easy task. I think we all recognize that fact having in mind our geography, climate and economic conditions. Quite apart from the understandable pull of winter sunshine resorts it must be realized that world wide competition for the tourist dollar is growing every year. Our United States friends have been alert to this competition and as early as 1958 a special report to the president-I think it was referred to as the Randall report-formed the basis of extensive "See America First" and "Come to America" national tourist programs. We in Canada are losing ground. The annual deficit in our travel account as I have mentioned, has now reached $215 million. Only a vigorous and extensive program directed at tourists at home and abroad can turn the tide. To ensure the success of such a program we

Supply-Northern Affairs must pursue an intensified course of raising our standards with respect to facilities and services if we are to expect our visitors from abroad to return or indeed our own people to accept enthusiastically a "See Canada First" or "Know Canada Better" program.
Tourism has grown tremendously in the past few years. Increased earnings, a shorter work week, longer holidays with pay, have all contributed greatly to making travel available to most people rather than to just the wealthy few as was the case in pre-war days. Tourism helps all segments of the economy. When people travel they spend their money on food and lodging, transportation, entertainment and a host of other services. Whether one operates a hotel or motel, a resort, a restaurant, a grocery store or is a manufacturer of sports clothes or equipment or operates a department store or sells gas or oil or even collects taxes, all benefit from the tourist dollar. Yes, tourism is everybody's business and it affects every area in this country. I believe there is a growing realization of this fact.
Considerable effort is being poured into the industry at the local, regional and provincial levels. In my own immediate area of Nipissing, which is a real vacationers' paradise, tourist spending amounts to $6 million annually. Many of our tourist operators are doing an excellent promotion job within their financial capabilities. Just the other evening at this meeting in North Bay to which I referred earlier many organizations such as N.O.T.A., N.O.O.A., Northern Ontario Outfitters Association; A.T.R.O., Associated Tourist Resorts of Ontario; O.T.C.A., Ontario Tourist Court Association and the important B.O.T.A., Board of Ontario Travel Associations were represented. These people are making a great contribution. In fact, these names are starting to sound like the various agencies of the United Nations. Of course, I should not forget our own North Bay Lakeshore Resorts Association.
I believe, however, that more federal leadership should be provided and is needed if Canada is to reverse the deficit trend in our tourist industry. Once we agree that tourism is everyone's business there should be a growing pooling of ideas and a greater spending and planning for the promotion of that industry.
We could persuade our visitors to stay longer. We could urge more visitors to come to Canada. We could urge more people to come to Canada in the winter time, and we could try harder to induce Canadians to spend their holidays in Canada.
A tourist does not have to be a person from another country. If 15 per cent of the Canadians who are now spending their holidays in other lands could be induced to spend

their holidays in Canada it would wipe out the yearly travel deficit which we have with the rest of the world.
Advertising alone will not solve this problem. Very often the emphasis is just on the spending of money. Surely this is not the answer. I believe there is room for more prudent spending, more pooling of ideas and a great opportunity for leadership at the federal level in this important industry.
Before resuming my seat I wish to refer to two further items. It will be recalled that last year representatives were sent to Europe to investigate the tourist potential from that part of the world because of the resurgence of the European economy. It was a very wise move to tap as much as possible this important market in this field. I hope the minister will say something about the actions of the federal government in this regard.
I should also like to refer to one other matter which I raised in the house earlier this session. I refer to the concern that some of us felt when President Kennedy asked congress to reduce to $100 from $500 the value of tax free goods United States' tourists could take back to their country at any one time. I think we were justified in feeling some concern at that time. There was an article in the Ottawa Journal of February 7 this year which refers to the attitude of the minister. The article was written by Gordon Dewar and says:
Little effect should be felt in the Canadian tourist industry if the U.S. congress should approve spending cuts for American tourists asked by President Kennedy Monday.
The article continues:
This, at least, is the opinion of federal government officials, including northern affairs minister Dinsdale, whose department is responsible for tourism in Canada.
An article was written by Harold Morrison of the Canadian Press. The article originated in Washington and appeared in the February 20 issue of the Ottawa Citizen. It refers to the attitude of the Prime Minister and says:
He-
That is the Prime Minister:
-had heard no objections in Canada to Kennedy's proposal to reduce the American tax free exemption on tourist goods to $100 from $500.
There was another story, again originating in Washington, which appeared in the March 7 issue of the Ottawa Citizen:
A congressional committee has deferred action on President Kennedy's proposal to reduce the maximum duty free allowance on tourist goods to $100 from $500 to permit further clarification of the Canadian position ...
It will be recalled that the Minister of Finance, in answer to a question I asked,

indicated that representations had finally been made by the minister when he visited Washington later in March.
I think we are justified in being concerned about this apparent lack of policy and the various positions and attitudes taken by this government in this very important matter. I hope the minister will have something to say on this subject.
Surely this will have a serious psychological effect on our relations with the United States in this regard. We are spending $100 million in excess of United States spending in Canada. Surely there is no justification for this action by the United States as far as Canada is concerned. I hope the minister will say a few words on this important matter in the course of his remarks.


Mr. MacLellan:: Mr. Chairman, since the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources is very active in my riding I know it will come as no surprise to the minister if I rise on his estimates to discuss his department's relations with my constituency and also to suggest to him ways in which his department can be of service in the future to Inverness-Richmond as it has been in the past.
However, I should first of all like to express my congratulations to the minister who has taken over this department so recently and has already shown such a firm and intelligent hand in its administration and in advancing the very good work begun by his predecessor, and indeed opening up new approaches himself.
I understand that the minister plans to come to Nova Scotia this summer. I must say that the people of my province will be very glad to welcome him and certainly I look forward very much to the opportunity to show him around Cape Breton Highlands national park in North Inverness. I know my colleague from Cape Breton North and Victoria will also look forward to that opportunity.
Also I should like to show the minister Fort Louisbourg in another part of my riding, which I know he would like to examine very fully when he has time to do so.
I should like to show him the famous Cabot trail, which is perhaps one of the most famous scenic spots in the eastern provinces, and I want to show him why so many tourists over the years have been attracted to this very wonderful part of Nova Scotia. He will drive over the new road that is almost completed and over the trail that will be completed by this July. I recall some 25 years ago when I first went over the Cabot trail the road was so narrow that there was scarcely room for one car. If you met somebody on the 90205-6-2474
Supply-Northern Affairs road you had to back down to a spot that was wide enough to allow the other car to go by. This was along the banks of a precipice in many cases and appeared very dangerous, even to me in those days.
I should also like to have the minister note what the Cape Breton Highlands national park has meant to the development of the tourist industry not only in Inverness country but indeed the whole of Nova Scotia. Our tourist industry has grown by leaps and bounds in the last few years and no small part of the reason for this is to be found in the attraction of the Cape Breton Highlands national park. The new camp sites built by the department and the general increase in facilities over the last two or three years have provided extra services for visitors to the park, and these services are very welcome. Indeed, the build-up of the tourist industry in that area stands as proof of the wisdom of the investment that has been made to date in the park.
Last year the registrations at the Cape Breton Highlands national park were 227,262. Every year recently there has been a big increase in the number of registrations. When we realize how important the tourist industry is, particularly to Cape Breton, we can understand what it has meant to this part of the country to have this very important and wise investment in the area. Every Nova Scotian town has a most important investment in the tourist industry, in terms of motels, hotels, restaurants and similar facilities. Nova Scotia is building up a very worth-while tourist industry and I am optimistic that it will continue to grow. We are very close to the vast population of the eastern seaboard of the United States and many of these people like to come to Nova Scotia, and they are coming in increasing numbers, to escape the heat of their cities and to feel the cool seabreezes of the maritime summer. I should like to compliment the minister and his department on the great increase in advertising respecting Nova Scotia. I am sure the increased money spent has had a lot to do with the increase we are seeing today in the number of tourists from the United States.
I may say also that in an area where the principal occupations have been fishing and lumbering the employment that has been provided to the local people in building up the park has been very welcome. The area around Cheticamp and North Inverness generally has presented in recent years a much more prosperous appearance as a result of the extra money available in those communities through the payrolls of the department. I hope this will continue, and, again, I assure the minister that every dollar spent in developing parks such as the Cape Breton

Supply-Northern Affairs national park is a good investment for Canada and the means of providing a worthwhile attraction for the tourists who will come to visit us.
As the tourist industry grows it will be necessary to continue the campsite building program and to assist in other ways to provide recreation and accommodation facilities in the park. I think it would be beneficial if a swimming pool were built on the Cheticamp side of the park. There is at present a golf course at Ingonish on the other side of the park but the time is coming when we shall need a second, and I suggest that this should be near Cheticamp.
When he is visiting I should like the minister to take a look at Cheticamp island because I believe that the acquisition of this land, or part of it, would be a valuable addition to present resources. This should be done without delay, because in a few years time the land might not be as readily available as it is today. We are going to need more campsites and recreation facilities, and Cheticamp island with its fine beaches and its tie-in with the rest of the park would be a natural addition.
Before leaving this topic I should like to pay a tribute to the superintendent of the park, Mr. F. C. Browning. He is a man well liked by all the citizens of the area and by the men who work for him. I know he has at heart the building up of the park and that he devotes a lot of time to planning and seeking out ways in which the park can be made a greater tourist attraction and of more use to the people of the surrounding area.
I should like, now, to address to the minister a few remarks on the subject of Louis-bourg. I am proud to have this famous historic spot in my riding and I know the minister will appreciate that this is the fourth occasion on which I have brought up this matter in the house. I should like to express my thanks to boards of trade in the area and to other associations which have from time to time sent me resolutions, and sent resolutions to the minister, regarding Louisburg, or who have sent briefs suggesting ways in which this great Canadian monument could be refurbished. In 1963 Louisburg will be commemorating its two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the town which, as all hon. members know, was first laid down in 1713. In 1958, at the bicentennial ceremonies, a large group of people turned out at Louisburg to take part, and I am sure that by 1963 as many as 100,000 people will be on hand. I think it is important that these people, who will have come from far and near to the fortress town, may have a chance to see there something which will give them a proper reward for their visit,

and that they may have a chance to carry away with them something of the story of this historic place.
There can be no doubt as to the historic importance of Louisburg. William Pitt referred to it as the "key to European power in the new world" during the days of the conflict between France and England out of which this country was born. Every day I meet Canadians from all parts of the nation who ask me: what is being done about Louisburg? Interest is widespread. Moreover, interest is not confined to Canada; it extends to those who live in the New England states, since many men from New England took part in the siege of 1745. Louisburg not only played a part in British history but in United States history as well. Further, I feel that apart altogether from the economic value which may attach to Louisburg, we Canadians are too prone to neglect the history of our nation; we spend too little time seeing to it that people learn the story of our national life. Some of the tales of Louisburg are of the greatest in Canadian history; the course of events which was shaped then has altered the lives of all Canadians today and, certainly, the bald phrases of the history books alone can never succeed in showing just what part this old fortress played in the early life of Canada.
I should like to emphasize the need for further expenditure at Louisburg while expressing my thanks for what has already been done there. I understand that this year there will be a number of guides there who will be familiar with the history of the spot and who will be able to tell visitors something about the Louisburg story. And a fulltime curator is to be appointed to take over the museum. Economically speaking I am certain our tourist industry will be greatly enhanced by the development of Louisburg. At present, only about one tenth of the people who go to the Cape Breton Highlands national park make a visit to Louisburg. Building up the site will bring many people down from Cabot trail to the southern side of the island and, encourage them to spend another two or three days on the island of Cape Breton.
Along with this I think that a new road should be constructed from Louisburg to St. Peters along the southern shore of Cape Breton and Richmond counties to open up an area which is known to very few and which is not now served by a good road. This would provide a circular route for tourists coming in at Port Hawkesbury and over the Cabot trail, and would allow them to leave from St. Peters. It would provide tourist

interest in that part of the province which certainly does not now have its share of visitors.
I know that the construction of highways is not within the province of the minister, but I hope some arrangement can be worked out with the province of Nova Scotia in the interest of bringing more people to fortress Louisburg and of the general development of the area.
I am not going to list the structures which I think should be built at Louisburg, or make suggestions in regard to restoration, as I know the minister is in possession of two or three briefs from the associated boards of trade of Cape Breton island in regard to this subject, as well as briefs from organizations in the town of Louisburg itself. I do think, however, that in time substantial restoration of a portion of the French town should take place.
It is important at once to acquire more land for the historic site. I am sad to say that Wolfe's Landing at Louisburg, which is east of the fortress, is not now within the historic site grounds. But the acquiring of a few extra acres would make it possible to bring this particularly interesting spot within the enclosure. I am sure that the department will wish to do this so as to preserve this site properly for all Canadians.
At this particular time, when new employment will be badly needed in Cape Breton Island, I would suggest to the minister that all possible steps should be taken to put under way, as soon as possible, a large construction program at Louisburg. Not only would the investment be a very sound one, as I have said, but the work done at the site, because of its nature, must be done by hand. It is the type of work that employs a large number of people and would provide assistance to many who will be out of work this summer if the proposed closing of some Dosco mines cannot be avoided. I urge the minister to begin to develop the Louisburg site as soon as possible for economic reasons as well as to properly display this very important historic monument in Canada.


Mr. McGrath:: Mr. Chairman, before the item carries I would like to ask for the indulgence of the committee for a few moments. We have heard hon. members this afternoon advocating various ways and means of increasing the flow of tourists to this country. We have heard suggestions in regard to the establishment and restoration of various historic sites and monuments in different parts of the country. It is in this regard that I would like to direct the minister's attention because, in my mind, there is no better way
Supply-Northern Affairs of graphically telling the story of a people than by means of historic sites, relics and monuments.
I would suggest that Canada abounds with history from coast to coast. All too often historic areas in perhaps more remote parts of the country tend to be forgotten in favour of the more well-known and accessible areas in the central part of Canada. In 1955 the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, on behalf of the government of Canada, proceeded with the establishment of a historic site on the easternmost tip of Canada which is, as a matter of fact, the easternmost tip of North America. This site, which is now under development as a national historic park, is equal in historic significance and import to the plains of Abraham in Quebec and other historic sites in the southern part of Ontario. This is the site of the last armed conflict in North America between the French and English during the seven years' war. It was at this site in the 1770's that the French and English fought for possession of North America. It was in the year 1705 that construction of a fort by the then British garrison was undertaken at this historic site. It was completed in the year 1711. It has been called the "Queen's fort", taking its name from Queen Anne, the then reigning monarch of Great Britain.
After this site was taken over as a national historic park in 1955 there followed a very slow period of development. I am sorry to say that to this day, some five or six years later, this historic site of national significance is sadly underdeveloped.
Regrettably, a few months ago one of the oldest landmarks in Canada, built in 1705, was destroyed by fire. With all due respect to my hon. friend, in whose constituency fort Louisbourg is located, I would suggest that this fort preceded Louisbourg fort by several years. As I say, in 1705 this grand old building was erected and in 1960 was burned down. As a result of the Department of Northern Affairs and Natural Resources in its wisdom evicting the old gentleman and his family who had lived in this building for many years, it was left without a custodian and, through lack of proper supervision, or perhaps as a result of carelessness, this historic site of national significance has been destroyed.
I would ask the minister to tell the committee when he expects Signal Hill historic park will be completed. Since 1955, when it was commenced, only a relatively minor paving program and some restoration to Cabot tower has taken place. I would suggest for the benefit of hon. members that this historic site is of interest from the point of view of contemporary history, because of the

Supply-Northern Affairs fact that in 1901 the first Marconi wireless message from Cornwall, England, was received at this site. I say this to illustrate the fact that here is a site of tremendous significance in the history of Canada, both in its early history and in its later development. I would suggest to those responsible in the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources that they immediately initiate a stepped up program for the completion of this area and for the restoration of that part of the Queen's fort which was destroyed by vandals, I believe, a few months ago for want of a proper custodian and a watchman.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I submit there are historical sites in Canada of less significance which are fully developed. I do not want to be specific but, for example, I hold in my hand a booklet put out by the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources through the Canadian travel bureau on Fort Malden national historic park at Amherstburg, Ontario. I have had the privilege of visiting this site. Some of my hon. friends from eastern Canada should visit some of the sites in Ontario and see how they are really and properly developed, what a tourist attraction they are and what a sense of pride they are to those residents of this part of Canada. On the cover of this booklet which commemorates this site of a historical nature, but in my submission of not the same historical importance as Signal Hill park, there is a very apt quotation, and I shall close with it in the hope that the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, who has brought so much zeal, vigour and enthusiasm to his new post, will give the attention that they justly deserve and demand to the historical sites of Canada. The quotation is by Joseph Howe, and it reads as follows:
A wise nation preserves its record, gathers up its muniments, decorates the tombs of its illustrious dead, repairs its great public structures and fosters national pride and love of country by perpetual reference to the sacrifices and glories of the past.


Mr. McGee:: I do not want to impede the progress of the committee. Perhaps before I make my request to the minister I should say that I was profoundly impressed by the arguments advanced by my hon. friend and seat mate from St. John's East. I was particularly impressed with the weight of his argument dealing with the burning of what surely must be one of the earliest structures in our national history.
I wish to ask the minister when he replies to bring us up to date on the progress of the request for the ossuary in Scarborough. For those hon. members who might not be aware of the significance of ossuaries, I would tell

them that the dictionary definition describes an ossuary as a pile of bones. A subdivider in Scarborough, in preparing his land for building, discovered a mound and within the mound a substantial quantity of bones which turned out to be early Indian bones. When the Seven Nations Indians heard about this a request was made to me and to the local council to approach the federal government with a view to recognizing the significance of those bones and to establish an ossuary and a plaque. Several ambitious schemes have been advanced along the lines of providing perhaps a replica of an early Indian village similar to the type of thing found in the national museum. I understand that many persons are still interested in that aspect of the development, but I would appreciate it if the minister could bring us up to date on the progress of the Scarborough ossuary.


Laurier Arthur Régnier: Mr. Chairman, I thought this was an appropriate time also to speak about the old buildings we have in the city of St. Boniface.
First, I should like to congratulate the minister on his activity and the very able way in which he has conducted himself in his office as the new Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. It is a very difficult post when you have almost all of northern Canada and almost half of Canada to look after.
In St. Boniface we have what I believe to be the oldest building in western Canada. It was constructed before 1846 to receive the four grey nuns who came to St. Boniface in that year. I hold in my hand the fifth volume of the St. Boniface historical society. They have taken a great interest in this building. This book refers to this building in a rather long quotation.


The Acting Chairman (Mr. Chown):: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but I thought it would be best to do so before he started his quotation.
It being five o'clock and in order to permit the house to proceed to the consideration of public and private bills, pursuant to section 3 of standing order 15, it is my duty to rise, report progress and request leave to sit again later this day, or at the next sitting of the house, as the case may be.
Progress reported.



PRIVATE BILLS

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



SMALL LOANS ACT


[Stage Direction]
On the order:
Second reading of Bill C-20, an act to amend the Small Loans Act.-Mr. Argue.
Hazen Robert Argue: Stand.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Hazen Robert Argue: I rise on a point of order, if I may. There has been a long standing custom in this house over a great many years, certainly all the time that I have been here, before the advent of this government, that when a public bill standing in the name of a private member was asked to stand it was automatically stood at the request of the member in whose name the bill appeared. This was done time after time and no question was raised as to this procedure. I think the practice was a correct one and that public bills in the name of private members are in fact private member's bills. In my opinion the procedure of the house from five o'clock to six o'clock should not be based on rules set out by the government or requests made by the government. Since this government took office, and in the last couple of years particularly, there has been a disposition to stand bills such as these first by request of the member in whose name the bill appears or by the request of the whip for the party concerned. Then, the Speaker would say, "at the request of the government," and the bill would stand in a routine fashion.
However, a week ago when Bill No. C-19, standing in my name, was called, I asked that it stand. I will agree that just a few minutes before I had not been too co-operative during the consideration of item No. 1 of the post office estimates. We are not always cooperative. I think sometimes hon. members on both sides dig in their heels. It was the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pick-ersgill) who initiated the procedure by pointing out rule 19. At that time the house leader, I take it because of what had happened a few moments before, said the government was not requesting that this bill stand. I immediately proceeded with it.
I had hoped today, however, that as a courtesy to me, this bill might have been allowed to stand without prejudice to its position on the order paper. I was informed this procedure would not be followed and that unless I was prepared to proceed with it at this time the government would not request that it stand and the bill would have to go to the bottom of the order paper. With the large number of public bills on the order paper this would mean that, for all practical purposes, the bill would be dead for this session.
Small Loans Act
My point of order is this: The rules have not been changed on this question. A practice of the house had been built up over many years, I think an excellent practice, whereby public bills standing in the name of private members would stand on the request of the private member with an indication that the government was agreeable. I suggest that the government is making a mistake in the rule that is now going to be laid down, as I understand, that private members' bills will not be allowed to stand. I feel this rule will not aid orderly discussion. I think it will make it difficult for us if we wish to stand two or three bills in order to debate a bill, say, on capital punishment in which all the members of the house may be interested. I understand that the house leader is laying down this as the practice the government will follow in the future, that private bills will not be stood at the request of the government.
I feel this rule amounts to contempt of the private members' hour. I think it shows the government is becoming very arrogant and very dictatorial in its attitude. It is now, by this means, wielding the big stick. For the first time in all the years I have been in the house the government, by this arbitrary rule, is going to say that from now on if a bill stands at the top of the order paper and is not moved, then it gets the guillotine. I suggest that on the basis of co-operation in the house, the need for some give and take, this is a stupid attitude the government is taking and a course that should not be followed.


Mr. Bell (Carleton):: The hon. gentleman, as usual, has used very extravagant language to describe the adherence to the rules which have been in existence for years. This issue was first raised on March 13, 1959, by the hon. member for Nickel Belt (Mr. Godin). The hon. member for Nickel Belt, as I understand it, is not a supporter of this government. He rose to a point of order at that time to the effect that standing order 19 required either that the motion for second reading of a bill must be proceeded with or that the bill should lose its precedence on the order paper. Mr. Speaker, in a lengthy statement at that time, indicated the way in which the rule had been applied and then said that the proper application of the rule required that bills should stand only at the request of the government. Subsequent to that, when a bill stood it stood at the request of the government with the house leader so indicating.
The last occasion on which this question was raised was, as the hon. gentleman said, last Friday. Was it a supporter of the government who raised the issue? It was not.

Small Loans Act
The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) raised the issue at that time. As a result of what the hon. member said, Mr. Speaker ruled as follows:
As I understand the rules, unless the government requests the postponement of consideration of the bill it does go to the bottom of the list automatically. In this case, in the past it has been taken that the government has requested that it stand. I shall ask specifically, now, since the point has been raised.
There is no question of doubt, Mr. Speaker. Standing order 19 is completely clear. It says:
Orders not proceeded with when called, upon the like request,-
This is a reference to the previous subsection which refers to the request of the government.
*-may be allowed to stand retaining their precedence; otherwise they shall be dropped and be placed on the order paper for the next sitting after those of the same class at a similar stage.
Now, sir on the basis of such a clear-cut rule, for the hon. gentleman to suggest that there is any contempt of private members is absurd. His use of the extravagant type of language he has used today shows that the hon. gentleman has no conception of the rules of this house.


Frank Howard: After that impassioned appeal by the hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Bell), I think I should make a comment on the point of order. I believe this procedure does indicate the great arrogance of the government and its desire to control parliament.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order; I am willing to listen to the hon. member but I wish he would discuss the interpretation of standing order 19, if he so desires. I think enough has been said on both sides now as to the attitude of both sides. I should like to hear the hon. member on the interpretation of standing order 19.


Frank Howard: Yes, Mr. Speaker, this is what I was proceeding to do. I was merely trying to follow the example set by the hon. member for Carleton.


An hon. Member:: He was following your example.


Frank Howard: The example was set by this government in its arrogant desire to control parliament.
I believe the hon. member for Carleton was quoting from the Journals for 1959, because I recognized the colour of the book he had in his hand. The hon. member said that this matter arose first on March 13, 1959. Well, in that regard he is quite incorrect. The matter arose on March 10, 1959. I shall attempt to read this quotation from Hansard to indicate to you that the practice prior to

that time was precisely the practice set out by the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue). I am reading from Hansard for March 10, 1959, page 1796. A point of order was raised by the hon. member for Nickel Belt (Mr. Godin) in respect of a bill relating to the printing of negotiable instruments in English and in French. The sponsor of that particular bill, I believe the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon), asked that it stand and I quote:


Mr. Godin:: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order it seems to me that the hon. member has asked twice that this bill stand. The question is before the house and many members of the opposition groups are interested in this matter and would like it dealt with in a very short time by having a vote taken on it.
The next speaker was the house leader, then minister of public works, and I read this to indicate to you that even that hon. gentleman, with his many years of experience in this house, believed this to be the practice. I quote:


Howard Charles Green: This is not a point of order at all. The hon. member has a perfect right to stand his bill just as the other hon. members have stood theirs. No point of order whatever has been raised by the hon. member.
This was the attitude of the house leader at that time, the present distinguished Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Green). I read this, sir, to show you that the practice outlined by the hon. member for Assiniboia has been the practice for many, many years. This rule merely indicates the desire of this government to interfere in the affairs of private members and to exert its control and authority beyond its jurisdiction; that is the point with which we must deal.


Mr. Nowlan:: That is sheer nonsense,
and I think one little word of reply should be made on behalf of private members. Many private members, for weeks and months during this session, have prepared to speak on some bill only to find that as a result of some private arrangement that has been made between members-


Hazen Robert Argue: Or the whips.


George Clyde Nowlan: -sometimes through the
whips, it is true, and sometimes without any consultation with the whips, their efforts have been wasted. It was because of the desire of the private members that some order should be brought into this performance, as was established three years ago with the Speaker, that this practice has been carried out. I admit that there may be an occasion-such as that when an hon. member is sick, is unavoidably prevented from coming to this House of Commons, is away in his own constituency or is on other business-when some

consideration might be given to that particular case. But on the matter of general practice, the rule is laid down clearly as adopted by this house-not by the government but by the house and by a preceding government, as far as that is concerned-and it has been laid down in the rulings of the Speaker.
I suggest that to imply that this is an imposition on private members or that this is an arbitrary action of the government is simply a play on words which should hardly be acceptable at this time.


Hazen Robert Argue: If I may I should like to reply to the point raised by the minister. He certainly created in my mind a new impression as to what the government's practice is likely to be in the future. The Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Nowlan) says that if a member is sick, is away on business or is unavoidably absent a different attitude may be taken-


George Clyde Nowlan: Might be taken.


Hazen Robert Argue: -or might be taken. I would suggest this does precisely the thing we are suggesting it is doing today. It lends itself to arbitrary interference by the government. It was a request which was not made by private members on this side, I am sure. I am sure it was made by the gang who sit around the minister.


George Clyde Nowlan: There is only one gang.


Hazen Robert Argue: The government now can give one type of treatment to a Tory member and another type of treatment to the opposition. I suggest that this is a flagrant disregard for the rights of members of this house.


An hon. Member:: That is a figment of your imagination.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. I think standing order 19 is clear that if an hon. member does not wish to proceed with a bill standing in his name, it will not be allowed to stand unless there is a request from the government. I think the case to which reference was made and which arose on March 10, 1959, was entirely different. I do not think that the quotation from Hansard, of the words of the then leader of the house would apply in the present case. Last week Mr. Speaker was very clear when a similar circumstance occurred. The rule is clear. The standing order gives a discretion to the government to request or not to request. Whether the government in the past has generally allowed bills to stand would not, in my view, have any application to the interpretation of the rule. I do not think I can rule otherwise than in the manner in which Mr. Speaker ruled last week. I therefore declare that unless the
Division
hon. member is ready to proceed with his bill it shall be dropped to the end of the orders.


Hazen Robert Argue: With deference to Your Honour I wish to appeal your ruling.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. The house has heard the decision. Those in favour of sustaining the decision of the Chair will please say yea.


Some hon. Members:: Yea.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Those opposed will please say nay.


Some hon. Members:: Nay.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: In my opinion the yeas have it.
And more than five members having risen;


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Call in the members.
Mr. Deputy Speaker put the question as follows:
The question is an appeal to the house from a decision of the Chair as follows:
Upon the order being read for second reading of Bill No. C-20, to amend the Small Loans Act. the hon. member for Assiniboia requested that the said order be allowed to stand and raised a point of order to the effect that it was the practice to allow such orders to stand when the sponsor so requested.
I ruled that the terms of standing order 19, paragraph 2, were explicit in this regard and that, in view of the recent ruling of Mr. Speaker on the same point, if the hon. member for Assiniboia did not proceed with the bill at this time it would drop to the foot of the list on the order paper.
Whereupon the hon. member for Assiniboia appealed to the house from the decision of the Chair.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I declare the decision of the Chair confirmed.


Hazen Robert Argue: I will proceed with my bill.


Hazen Robert Argue: the second reading of Bill No. C-20 to amend the Small Loans Act (Advertising).
He said: I am pleased to move once again a bill which has for its purpose the lowering of interest rates which may be charged by small loans companies in this country. I have had the opportunity to move similar bills back over the years. The first time I moved a bill in these terms was in 1954. At that time it received some support in the house. The Conservative opposition in the house of that day was silent and non-com-mital. The Liberal government followed the practice of putting on a cabinet minister who set forward the position taken by the government and, although this was not always the case at that time, they did follow the practice of talking the bill out.
I do not think I have been associated with any public bill or with any cause at all in a public bill which has received wider support in this nation than the contention that small loan companies are fleecing the public, that their interest rates are exorbitant and that it is time, in the interests of the consumer and the borrower, that parliament should act to further control the rates of interest which can be charged by small loan companies. When this bill was moved on a former occasion it created a great deal of stir in the country and aroused a great deal of public support.

In 1956, I think it was, the minister of finance introduced a bill which was eventually incorporated into the Small Loans Act which extended to a large extent the area of control of interest rates that may be charged by small loans companies. Before that time the control amounted to a ceiling of 2 per cent per month on loans up to $500. With the passage of this particular amendment at that time, on loans up to $300 the 2 per cent provision was allowed or permitted; on loans in excess of $300 but less than $1,000, 1 per cent was provided and for unpaid balances in excess of $1,000 half of 1 per cent per month was the ceiling provided. There is no doubt in my mind that this step forward saved the consumers of this country many millions of dollars.
We in this group are asking by this measure that the area of control should now be further extended and that action should be taken by parliament to save the consumers and borrowers of this country millions of dollars in exorbitant interest rates. I have been discouraged, or, perhaps I should say, I have been disappointed by the attitude taken by the Conservative members in general. In the past they have not been sympathetic to these proposals. They have argued that in a free enterprise economy you should let the buyer beware; that it is the fault of the borrower if these things happen and that parliament should not be asked to increase its jurisdiction in order to protect the ordinary Canadian borrower or consumer. Recently, however, there have been signs of an encouraging change in the attitude of at least some of the hon. members who sit opposite.
A week ago when I proposed Bill No. C-19 which would make it necessary by law for small loans companies to set forth in their advertising the interest rates that could be charged I received a good deal of vocal support from certain members of the Conservative party though this support did not extend to the point of allowing a vote to be taken. Although I said to the hon. member for Inverness-Richmond (Mr. MaeLellan) that he had killed the bill by extended faint praise- by talking it out-the tenor of his remarks was more favourable than were the comments of some of the other members of the Conservative party on former occasions. The hon. member for Inverness-Richmond had this to say at one point in his remarks:
I support the general principle of this bill. I should like to see the matter examined further by a committee of this house.
The hon. member for Davenport (Mr. Morton) who has probably been the most active and most talkative member on the government side with regard to bills of this

nature has been something of a killer member on the government side of the house. His job seems to have been to do anything he could to kill these bills, and he has been very successful. He has helped himself. He has set an example to members around him. He has talked on these bills. He has pointed out weaknesses, some real, no doubt, but most of them imaginary. He has spent a large part of his time making certain that these bills were talked out and killed. However, I noticed in that hon. member also what I took to be a change of emphasis in his statement of a week ago. He seemed at that time to have something more in mind than simply running down the provisions of the bill. He seemed to take a more constructive attitude and I hope this indicates a change in the attitude not only of the hon. member but on the part of the majority of the members on that side of the house. I would hope that this means the government will, in future, take a more lenient view to the proposals put forward in this and other bills I have moved regarding interest rates in Canada.
The hon. member for Davenport had the following to say, as reported at page 3698 of Hansard of April 14, 1961:
Judging by the various bills that have been introduced in the house and the information put before the house within the last few years by members on all sides. I would say the time has come when the whole matter of interest, the Interest Act and the Small Loans Act, as well as this proposed legislation should be reviewed in toto.
He went on to say that there should be a periodic review, and this review should be undertaken by the banking and commerce committee. I hope that the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Bell) will follow me in this debate, and I would express the hope that when he makes his comments he will confirm the statement that was made by the hon. member for Davenport. I hope he will make it clear to the house that the government is prepared to take a more lenient attitude toward this measure. I would also make a plea that the government refer this bill, and the other bills I have on the order paper dealing with interest rates, the ceiling on interest rates, and advertising, to the banking and commerce committee this session so that we may have a thorough review of the interest provisions in these acts, and so they may be changed to provide greater protection to the consumers in this country.
There exists a provision in the Small Loans Act providing for control, as set forth in the legislation, on loans up to a maximum of $1,500. In respect of loans over $1,500 there is no control, so that a small loans company making a loan of $1,501 is able to charge
Small Loans Act
25 per cent, 30 per cent or 35 per cent. Some companies charge, as most hon. members realize, 60 per cent and 70 per cent.
I have in my hand a credit union publication which has reference to interest rates being charged on second mortgages, and it refers to this as the "second mortgage cancer in Canada".


Mr. Smith (Winnipeg North):: What does that have to do with loan companies?


Hazen Robert Argue: Does my hon. friend realize that I have been talking about this bill?


Mr. Woolliams:: The hon. member for Assini-boia (Mr. Argue) does not understand it.


Hazen Robert Argue: I have been referring to this and other bills having to do with controls on interest rates which would make these cancerous rates prohibited by law. That is what I am endeavouring to put before the house.
I notice the hon. member does not say that these cancerous rates are not charged, but simply asks questions. Of course, he is in favour of the loan sharks. He has made that quite clear in his speeches. He likes high interest rates, but I do not. I feel they are a disgrace to Canada and the party in power.


William Murray Smith: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. The hon. member has said I am in favour of loan sharks and high interest rates. At no time have I said that. I challenge the hon. member to show in Hansard where I have said that.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Hear, hear.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker, the record is clear. I withdraw nothing. The hon. member can put his statement on record if he wishes.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: The same old line.


Hazen Robert Argue: The long-absent member for Bow River (Mr. Woolliams) is now back in the house. I noticed that when the Aurora Pipe Line Company bill in his name was presented we went ahead in his absence. I do not know where he was, if he was unavoidably detained or, if so, by whom. However, he was not here. He is here today, however, to make his intervention on behalf of the loan sharks and this high interest rate, by heaping ridicule on what I think is a bill having good principles and purpose.
I have a report of the superintendent of insurance in my hand, which shows what a lucrative business the small loans business is. We have in existence today the Beneficial Finance Company. It changed its name some time ago. It benefits the company but I do not know if it benefits borrowers very much. That company has an authorized capital stock

Small Loans Act
of $10 million. That company has subscribed and paid up cash amounting to $1 million. According to the 1958 statistics that company made a net profit for the year of $5,230,000 on its paid up capital of $1 million, with income earned on small loans to the tune of $12.2 million.
Household Finance, the other giant in this field, has done equally well. This is a very lucrative field in which handsome profits are made, a field which is controlled by United States capital. This fact may no longer influence hon. members opposite, but the two large firms-Household Finance and Beneficial Finance-have made approximately 70 per cent of the loans in this country, and are controlled outside of this country.
I suggest that, in every respect, this bill and the other bills I have moved in this regard, warrant the support of all members of the house. I ask the government to sympathetically consider action along the lines set forth in these bills at the present session of parliament. Let us end this fleecing by bringing small loans companies under better control. Let us make a provision that interest rates charged in this country shall not be extortionate.


Mr. R. J. McCleave (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, I would first like to set the record straight. We heard the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) at the beginning of his speech, shortly after another issue was settled at five o'clock, make the suggestions that this bill had been presented to the house during the past five, six or seven years, and that it had been talked out. Actually this is only the second time since changes were made in the Small Loans Act in 1956 that this bill has even proceeded to the stage where it was debated on second reading.


Hazen Robert Argue: I referred to this and other bills.


Robert Jardine McCleave: The hon. member has made his speech and perhaps he will be good enough to allow me to make mine.
The first bill was presented on April 17, 1959. Having read the debate for that year in that regard I can see why the hon. member for Assiniboia was somewhat irritated by the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Smith). The hon. member for Winnipeg North made some rather unflattering remarks about the amount of research that had not been done by the hon. member for Assiniboia in presenting the measure at that time. Since my time is short I will not repeat them, but I certainly endorse the remarks found in that particular debate.
The fact is, we have an emotional issue before us this afternoon. A debate on an emotional issue always presents an opportunity for members to rise and fulminate against

the money lending section of the population. If we intended to be truly political we could certainly back up those remarks without bothering to find out the consequences of any bill we passed. I think if this measure were passed the moneylenders in this country would be automatically out of business. I might say that I am in favour of that particular course because I have, fortunately, not had occasion to go to the small loans companies so far, and hope I never will. However, perhaps more than a million individuals have had occasion to do business with them.
The purpose of this bill is really to reduce from 2 per cent per month to 1 per cent per month the interest paid on small loans. At present the rate is 2 per cent per month up to $300; then 1 per cent from $300 to $1,000; and then one half of one per cent from $1,000 to $1,500, and there the operations of the act cease. Therefore, the effect would be to reduce the amount from 2 per cent per month to 1 per cent per month on all loans up to the figure of $300.
The difficulty I find in this bill-and I should like to support it-is to know just what effect it will have. I tried to make some rough calculations. I calculated that perhaps this would reduce the amount of interest paid to small loans operators by as much as $15 million or perhaps $20 million a year. Then, looking at Mr. MacGregor's report on small loans companies, moneylenders, for the year ended December 31, 1959, I found that the gross profit of small loans companies was something of the order of $15.9 million for the year 1959. For the previous year, 1958, it had been around $15.1 million. If my calculations are correct, and unfortunately I cannot claim very much accuracy for them, it would mean that the amount of gross profit, or the profit to run the business, would practically disappear and perforce the companies themselves would also have to disappear. I am not saying this is a particularly bad thing, at least in my case, but it might be bad for Canadians who were forced to forsake this particular group to borrow their money and go to some other particular group.
You see, Mr. Speaker, the difficulty is that we have no figures in Mr. MacGregor's excellent report-and it is an excellent report and well worth reading-showing the amount of loans up to $300. For example, on page VI of the first part the figures are for loans from $100 to $500 and $501 to $1,000 and from $1,001 to $1,500. This makes it extremely difficult to calculate the exact effect of the bill of the hon. member for Assiniboia. For this reason I suggest that the best approach to the bill is to send it to the banking and commerce committee where we could find out

the real effect of the change and the magnitude of what is proposed by the hon. member for Assiniboia.
I think the hon. member said on another occasion-I hope he will correct me if I am wrong-that he was not particularly wedded to these figures but that at least he wanted figures substantially lower than the rates that exist at the present time. I think I have given the gist of what he said previously. He nods his head in agreement. With that I can agree. I do think this subject needs another review. There are large areas in which our knowledge could be improved so that we would know exactly what we were getting into. At least with the small loans companies you see the shark for what he is- he is a licensed shark-but if you remove him as a source of credit or as a source of money for people who are in need, then you immediately drive them to people who will make the small loans shark appear almost like a saint by comparison. The problem, without putting haloes on these characters' heads, is to recognize at least there are much worse types of money operators in this country than these people.
Hr. MacGregor's report also gives other interesting information. But, Mr. Speaker, I see I am coming up to six o'clock. I hoped not to be in this particular position because I feel rather strongly on the subject of the bill, as does the hon. member for Assiniboia. Unfortunately, part of the time that I otherwise would have had for speaking was interrupted by a different procedure within this hour.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I must inform the house that if the hon. member speaks now he will close the debate.
21, 1961	3913
Business of the House


Robert Jardine McCleave: I believe I had asked to have six o'clock called.


Hazen Robert Argue: I had not heard it.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The hon. member for Winnipeg North is seeking the floor.


Hazen Robert Argue: Just to kill the bill.


Mr. Cardiff:: The hon. member killed it; he talked 20 minutes on it.


Hazen Robert Argue: He had no speech; he just stood up to kill the bill.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: It is now six o'clock.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Lionel Chevrier: May I inquire of the house leader what the business is for next week?


George Clyde Nowlan: The proposal is that on Monday the Prime Minister will move the motion with respect to hours of sitting to be applicable, I believe, the following week. Once that is concluded, the house will have a motion to go into supply which will last for the remainder of Monday and all day Tuesday. Then, on Wednesday and Thursday we will have time available, if it is required, for dealing with the estimates of the Department of External Affairs and a debate on matters involved in external affairs. Then on Friday we shall proceed with the estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. These are tentative proposals and undoubtedly they will be carried out barring some circumstance arising which cannot be foreseen at the moment.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, April 24, 1961