1962-02-28

Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege affecting all members of the House of Commons and relating to the report of debates. If you will look at Hansard, page 1296, in the second column you will find that I used these words:
Mr. Speaker, every election promise that has been made has been carried out or will be carried out in the near future.
That was followed by a remark by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate-I regret he is not here today-who commended me for what I said by using the words "No one will suffer". In looking at Hansard now I discover that quotation marks have been placed around that expression as if it were not his own. I submit, Mr. Speaker, that this is improper -


Mr. Robichaud:: We know where it comes from.


Gordon Minto Churchill: -that this is an improper action on the part of those responsible, because I fail to understand how the Hansard reporters, who do such efficient work here, would be able to put quotation marks around any interjection. On looking through a large number of Hansards I have been unable to find any instance where an interjection has quotation marks placed around it.
The reason I draw it to your attention, sir, is this. If this practice of altering Hansard by a member is continued it may lead to some very peculiar instances in the future of interjections being made by members and then of recourse to the debates office to have quotation marks placed around those interjections to attribute them to some other source. I consider, sir, that this is an infringement of the rights and privileges of the House of Commons, by this alteration in Hansard without authority.


Hon. Paul Marlin (Essex East):: May I speak to the point the Minister of Veterans Affairs made. There is no proof whatever that there has been any alteration to Hansard. In any 26207-1-85i
event the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate is not in his seat. He is engaged on business that pertains to his duties as a member of parliament. It certainly would be most improper to deal with this matter, in which the hon. gentleman is involved, in his absence. In any event, the minister has not made out any case whatever. He only reminded us again of the promise made by the Prime Minister.


Mr. Speaker:: It is true the matter affects the hon. member who is not here. He will undoubtedly see it in Hansard, and if he has any comment to make about the complaint perhaps he can say so when he is next in the house. On its face it appears that the editing is not correct, in that there are quotation marks where there was no indication of a quotation.



MR. MARTIN, ESSEX EAST    OBJECTION TO HEADING IN REPORT OF DEBATES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Joseph James Martin: On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, may I say that on page 1297 of yesterday's Hansard-I think this is a real question of privilege which has some validity, as compared with the false one already raised-if Your Honour will look at the title just above the observations made by Mr. D. V. Pugh, the member for Okanagan Boundary, he will find, "Alleged lack of economic growth". That is not correct. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, you will agree that the word "alleged" is improperly used in this title, because the opposition has taken the position that there has been a stunting in Canada's economic growth.


Mr. Speaker:: I was not aware that the hon. member for Okanagan Boundary was a member of the opposition.


Mr. Marlin (Essex Easl):: I am sure that Your Honour would not want that remark to be taken seriously, because the title refers not only to what the hon. member said-


Mr. Walker:: No one will take you seriously.


Murdo William Martin: No more seriously than the people of Canada did my hon. friend last night in connection with a most remarkable performance. What the editor, I am sure with no bad intention, has done is to use the word "alleged" in connection with not only the speech of the hon. member for Okanagan

Questions
Boundary but the whole content of the debate. Now, the opposition has argued that there has been-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I think it is unnecessary for the hon. member to do more than draw attention to his objection. I will discuss the matter with the editor.


Hon. E. D. Fulton (Minister of Justice):: On the same question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, may I draw your attention to the fact that the whole alleged complaint, properly I submit, bears that title; for the Hansard editor wisely inserted the same title over the text of the very speech by which the subject was introduced. I suggest to you, sir, this is clear proof, if proof were necessary, that it is an appropriate title not only to the content but to the manner in which it was raised.


Mr. Benidickson:: You should not push civil servants the way you do.
(Translation):



CROWN CORPORATIONS


Mr. Marcel Bourbonnais (Vaudreuil-Sou-langes) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-72, respecting the administration of certain crown corporations.


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Marcel Bourbonnais: The purpose of this bill is to enable the government to appoint members of this house on the board of crown corporations. The House of Commons and the parliamentary committees would then be better informed on the decisions taken by the management of the crown corporations. At the same time, certain prejudices entertained by the public when some of these corporations show deficits would be removed.
(Text):



QUESTIONS

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)
^CONSTRUCTION TENDERS, E.M.O. HEADQUARTERS, N.S.
['Mr. Speaker, the answer to No. 1 is no, the answer to No. 2 is no, and the answer to No. 3 is no.']
Mr. O'Hurley:: 1.	Tenders have been called for the construction of an E.M.O. headquarters at Debert,

Colchester county, Nova Scotia. The following is a list of firms which tendered, and the prices:
McDonald Construction Co.
Ltd., Bedford, Nova Scotia. $2,160,210.
Kenney Construction Co. Ltd.,
Yarmouth, Nova Scotia ... $2,360,000.
Cameron Contracting Ltd., Halifax, Nova Scotia	 $2,423,198.
Acadia Construction Ltd.,
Bridgewater, Nova Scotia .. $2,774,444.
A tender for a portion of the project was also received from Annapolis Valley Construction Ltd., Bedford, Nova Scotia, in the amount of $1,663,000.
2.	A contract for the complete project was awarded to McDonald Construction Co. Ltd., Bedford, Nova Scotia, the low bidder.



Mr. Tucker: 1.	Who first suggested the use of the slogan "Why wait for spring? Do it now", by the Post Office Department, and on what date was the suggestion received?
2.	Was the suggestion accepted immediately and, if not, why not?
3.	When was it decided to use this slogan on letters passing through the mail?


Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: 1.	Mr. G. G. Blackburn, director, information branch, Department of Labour, first suggested the use of the slogan during discussions in June, 1956, with officials of the public relations division, Post Office Department.
2.	Final wording of the slogan for use in postal cancelling dies was confirmed to the superintendent, public relations division, on July 4, 1956, and accepted immediately; use of the dies to commence on January 15, 1957.
3.	The third part of the question is answered in the second section of the answer.


*POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT
Mr. Fisher: Unto the date February 1, 1962, what effects, If any, have been noted by the Post Office Department as a result of (a) the reciprocal postal rate for publishers in Canada and the United States of America made effective in 1961 (b) the mailed in Canada rate for foreign publications shipped across the border in bulk and placed in the Canadian mail?


William McLean Hamilton: (a) Since the reciprocal postal rate for publishers in Canada and the United States was placed in effect on July 1, 1961, an additional 11 United States publications, which were formerly posted in the United States, are now being forwarded by the publishers to Canada, in bulk, for mailing in Canada to Canadian subscribers.

(to) The present indications are that as a result of an increase in the number of United States publications being mailed in Canada, and an increase in the "mailing in Canada" rate of postage, which was placed in effect on August 1, 1961, the Canada post office will receive an estimated one and three quarter million dollars additional revenue per annum from the publishers of foreign newspapers and periodicals mailed in this country.


PORTRAIT OF LATE R. B. BENNETT
Mr. McWilliam: 1.	Is the portrait of the late prime minister R. B. Bennett, donated by Lord Beaverbrook in the government's possession?
2.	If so, is it the intention of the government to take the necessary action to have the portrait of the only native New Brunswick prime minister hung in the parliament building?
Answer by: Mr. Diefenbaker:
1.	Yes, and has been since the presentation to the Canadian people was made through the generosity of Lord Beaverbrook and the University of New Brunswick.
2.	Having regard to the size of the portraits of former prime ministers on display in the foyer of the House of Commons, the opinion was that the size of the portrait did not lend itself to be placed permanently among the larger portraits of former prime ministers, and a portrait of Lord Bennett of larger size is being secured.
^PAMPHLET "OTTAWA AIRPORT"

Question No. 204-Mr. Hellyer:
1.	How many copies of the pamphlet "Ottawa Airport" were printed in the two official languages?
2.	What was the reason for the pamphlet?
3.	What was the estimated cost?


Mr. Martini:: 1.	Number printed-20,000 English, 7,000 French.
2.	The department has found a very substantial demand for basic information in pamphlet and pictorial form regarding Canadian airport and terminal developments both in connection with opening ceremonies and on a continuing basis. The pamphlet has served both to provide this information at the time of the opening and to satisfy a continuing stream of inquiries from press, radio and television sources, students, writers, airport organizations in other countries, and from various sources, domestic and foreign.
3.	Cost $1,680.17.


*ROADS TO RESOURCES, ONTARIO
Mr. Benidickson: 1. Has the government of Ontario yet requested the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources:
Questions
(a)	To approve, in writing, a road to provide access to potential mineral and timber resources north of Minaki, Ontario, as contemplated in section 2(c) of an agreement, dated December 22, 1959, between the government of Canada and the government of Ontario, or,
(b)	To approve for inclusion in the agreement any other road to resources in the area such as to the base metal mines near Werner lake, Ontario?
2.	If the answer to 1(a) is in the affirmative, when was the request made?
3,	If the answer to 1(b) is in the affirmative, when was the request made, and what are the points of commencement and termination of the road?


Mr. Dinsdale:: The answer to 1, 2 and 3 is as follows:
The original program put forward by the province of Ontario in 1958 to be considered in the roads to resources agreement included a project for the improvement of an existing road and the construction of a section of new road from Minaki in the area around Werner lake. The route of the road as proposed was acceptable as a resource road in that it ran through a highly promising mineral and timber area with good potential for the future. While this road was not one of the projects scheduled for early construction, to cover future contingencies, section 2(l)(c) of the agreement-which 1 assume is the same as the section 2(c) referred to by the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River-provided for the inclusion of this road in the program at a later date, subject to my approval in writing, but without the necessity for a supplementary agreement.
By letter dated November 27, 1961, I received from the secretary of the Ontario government's mining access road committee an inquiry as to whether the agreement could be interpreted as meaning that consideration would be given toward approval of improving the existing road from Caribou falls dam site northerly to the base metal mines near Werner lake, by the construction of an additional 18 miles. On December 1, 1961 I replied indicating that section 2(l)(c) of the agreement would apply in this case.


William Moore Benidickson: My question was needed.


* &quot;OPERATION FREEDOM&quot; BROADCASTS
Mr. Fisher: 1.	Has the board of broadcast governors received and scrutinized the various materials prepared by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce for its so-called "Operation Freedom"?
2.	Has the board examined the releases designed for public service use by radio and television stations which are contained in these kits; and, if so, has it determined whether such material for commentary or spots should be labelled as political statements in the sense that it may attack one or more political parties and support one or more political parties?
3.	Has the board considered whether the matter of equal time for rebuttal should be applied with regard to this "Operation Freedom" propaganda;

Questions
and, if not, would the board consider making an appraisal of the material with a view to determining whether this is the right step to be taken?


Mr. Nowlan:: Mr. Speaker, the answer to No. 1 is no, the answer to No. 2 is no, and the answer to No. 3 is no.



* RADAR GAP FILLER STATIONS


Mr. Fisher: In construction, repair, or maintenance work at the Department of National Defence radar gap fillers, are specifications for contractors so designed that Canadian equipment and material shall be used; (a) if not, would any specifications given to bidders on work at these filler stations contain the requirements of a kitchen range specified as follows: "Dewyer kitchen unit No. E 39-81-5 made by Dewyer Products Corp. Michigan City, Ind., U.S.A."	(b) if so, was a Canadian product
unsuitable?


Mr. Chambers:: Specifications for the equipment referred to in this question contain the following clause: "To the full extent to which they are procurable, consistent with proper economy and the expeditious carrying out of the work, Canadian labour and material shall be employed".
The combination refrigerator, range and sink unit quoted in the specifications was used as a criterion only. If an equivalent product were manufactured in Canada, it would be acceptable.



MR. AND MRS. KARL BUDAN, ALGOMA MILLS, ONT.  POST OFFICE EMPLOYMENT

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 212*-Mr. Herridge:
Did Mr. Karl Budan of Algoma Mills, Ontario, write to the Postmaster General on or about January 31 protesting that he and his wife had not been provided an opportunity to obtain employment with the Post Office Department; and, if so. what was the nature of the reply?
Answer by: Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de
Grace):
Yes. The reply was to the effect that at the two post offices mentioned the regular staff was deemed sufficient to handle the additional work during this period. No extra help, authorized and paid by the Post Office Department, was employed at these offices in the past Christmas season.

Mr. Herridge: With regard to the purchase of the Pacific Great Eastern Railway by the Canadian National Railways, have there been any discussions or have any discussions been proposed between the federal government and the government of British Columbia or the officers of the Pacific Great Eastern Railway?
Answer by: Mr. Martini:
There have been no discussions between the federal government and the provincial

government or between the federal government and the railway concerned with respect to the subject matter assumed by the question.
With respect to the Canadian National Railways, the president has advised that he had a personal conversation with Premier Bennett during a short interview on Monday, February 12 and that general railway questions affecting traffic co-operation between the Pacific Great Eastern Railway and Canadian National Railways were discussed.



* PRINTING ERROR IN PAMPHLET &quot;NATIONAL AVIATION MUSEUM&quot;

Mr. Hellyer: Were a number of pamphlets, entitled "National Aviation Museum", printed with an error In the spelling of the French translation and subsequently destroyed as a consequence; and, if so, how many were printed, and what was the cost of the copies destroyed?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: In May of 1960 in preparation for the establishment of the national aviation museum in time for the celebration of the golden anniversary of flying in Canada, 100,000 copies of a leaflet were printed for distribution to visitors when the museum opened. This descriptive leaflet carried text in both French and English on a reversible self cover. Because of the many years of delay in getting this project under way, the work had to be done hurriedly, and unfortunately a spelling error in the original art work for the French cover was not discovered until the printing had been completed. The leaflet was reprinted at a cost of $1,300, which was the cost of the original printing.
The national aviation museum has since come under the jurisdiction of the museum branch of my department. Hon. members will be interested to learn that the museum has attracted widespread public interest and no less than 143,000 persons visited it in 1961.


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: In view of this-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. minister is not called upon to make a case, but only to answer the question.



*MILK SUBSIDY PAYMENTS, EASTERN PROVINCES

Mr. Pigeon: Since the federal Department of Agriculture has been paying to farmers a 25 cent subsidy for each 100 pounds of milk transformed into butter and cheese, what is the total amount received by the farmers of the eastern provinces, that is to say the provinces of Quebec, Ontario, and the mari times?


Mr. Charlton:: Up to January 31, 1962, $31,843,000 has been paid to farmers in the

provinces of Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island under the 25 cents per hundred pounds subsidy on milk used for manufacturing purposes.



* BUTTER SUBSIDY PAYMENTS, EASTERN PROVINCES

Mr. Pigeon: Since the price of butter has been raised by the present government from 58 to 64 cents per pound, what is the total additional amount of money thereby paid to the farmers of the eastern provinces, that is to say the provinces of Quebec, Ontario, and the maritimes?


John Alpheus Charlton: Creamery butter production in Ontario, Quebec and the maritime provinces totalled 920,772,000 pounds from May 1, 1958 when the price of butter was raised from 58 cents to 64 cents a pound, to January 31, 1962. The increase of 6 cents per pound on this quantity is equivalent to $55,246,320 additional returns to the producers in these provinces.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 13-Mr. Mcllrailh (for Mr. Chevrier):
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence between the Minister of Transport and the president of Quebecair Limited and/or any other person or persons since January 1, 1960, concerning the granting of exclusive rights to Quebecair Limited to operate between Seven Islands and Quebec.
Mr. Balcer:: There would be no objection to this motion.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the house agreed that this motion may be presented by the hon. member for Ottawa West?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 14-Mr. Mcllrailh (for Mr. Chevrier):
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence between the Minister of Transport and the president of Quebecair Limited and/or any other person or persons since January 1,	1960, concerning the
application for a subsidy or a payment for its winter operations or for any assistance whatsoever to Quebecair Limited for its air services on the lower St. Lawrence.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 16-Mr. Herridge (for Mr. Winch):
Motions for Papers
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, and other documents exchanged between the government of Canada and the government of British Columbia since January 1, 1960, relating to the establishment of Garibaldi park in British Columbia as a national park.
Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: In view of the fact that there has been no correspondence on this subject since the date indicated, I wonder if the hon. member would consider withdrawing the motion.


Mr. Herridge:: In those circumstances there would be no objection on the part of this group.


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps the house would allow the motion to stand, because the hon. member for Vancouver East is not here to give his consent to withdraw it.
Motion stands.



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT &quot;DO IT NOW&quot; SLOGAN

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 17-Mr. Tucker:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of any correspondence since July 1, 1959, from any person or organization, with the Minister of Labour or the Postmaster General, or any official of either or both departments, regarding the use of the slogan "Why wait for Spring? Do it now."
Mr. Starr:: I am advised1 by my officials that apart from correspondence between officers of the Department of Labour and the Post Office Department, which is considered privileged, there has been no other correspondence on this matter. In view of this I would ask that the hon. member consider dropping this motion.


Mr. Speaker:: Does the hon. member agree?


Mr. Tucker:: I agree.
Order discharged and motion dropped.



EXPORT STRATEGIC LIST

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 18-Mr. Mcllrailh:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of the strategic list referred to by the Minister of Trade and Commerce, page 708, Hansard, February 9, 1962.
Gordon Minto Churchill: The Minister of Trade and Commerce has given me the following information on this subject. A similar question was raised in 1956 on July 9; the reference in Hansard is to page 5768. The then minister of trade and commerce, Right Hon. C. D. Howe, said:
Hon. members will appreciate that I cannot table secret and confidential information exchanged with certain NATO and other friendly countries covering controls over the shipment of strategic goods...
This motion cannot be accepted.


Mr. Mcllrailh:: This raises a question of privilege, inasmuch as the minister who has just taken his seat has referred to another

Motions for Papers
list. The reference in Hansard of that date is not to a question which had to do with the Export and Import Permits Act. The remarks of the former minister of trade and commerce had to do with a list which was of international significance in relation to NATO. The two lists are different. The remarks of the minister are not applicable.


Mr. Speaker:: The motion might stand until the Minister of Trade and Commerce is here.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The question asked for the strategic list. The answer has been given with regard to that list.


Paul Joseph James Martin: There are two strategic lists.


George James McIlraith: They are two different matters.


Mr. Speaker:: By unanimous consent the motion may be allowed to stand. Otherwise it should be proceeded with. Is it agreed that the motion stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


George James McIlraith: Stand until the minister is here.


Mr. Speaker:: Stand.
Motion stands.



INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE SUBMISSION ON RAND REPORT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 19-Mr. Robichaud:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of the report made by an interdepartmental committee for submission to the government on the recommendations made by Mr. Justice Rand relating to the Nova Scotia coal industry.
Mr. Flynn:: As indicated on February 8 by the Prime Minister, when he answered a question about this report put by the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria (Mr. Muir), the report referred to in this motion is privileged and it is contrary to the practice to produce it. I was wondering whether the hon. member would insist on putting his motion. If so, we would have to oppose it.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: In view of the explanation given by the minister I will accept the suggestion that this motion be dropped. However, I intend to come back to the matter later this day during discussion of the estimates.


Mr. Speaker:: Dropped.
Order discharged and motion dropped.



PURCHASE OF RAILS FROM C.N.R., QUE.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 22-Mr. Brassard (Lapointe):
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence exchanged between any department or minister and the president of J. P.

Boisjoly Industries Limitee, from September 1. 1957, to September 1, 1961, regarding the purchase of rails from the Canadian National Railways at St. Philemon, Chateauguay county, in the province of Quebec.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 23-Mr. Tucker:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of a letter addressed by the secretary of lodge number 1237 of the international association of machinists, St. John's, Newfoundland, to the Minister of Transport since January 1, 1962, concerning the Argentia ferry terminal together with a copy of any reply thereto.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Joseph James Martin: I should like to direct a question to the Acting Secretary of State for External Affairs in the absence of the minister. Notice of this question was sent to the minister's office this morning. Has any agreement been reached between the government of the United States and the government of Canada or any agency or person thereof that would ensure the delivery to Canada of nuclear weapons either before or after the outbreak of war?
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime
Minister): Mr. Speaker, the answer is in the negative.


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Trinity):: I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether he saw the program which has been characterized as the great Canadian comedy last night on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation network at ten o'clock, and whether the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Walker) was speaking on behalf of the government when he said:
-if we have atomic warheads here we want to have them under our own sole control. That is perfectly natural.


Mr. Diefenbaker:: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to reply in kind. After all, the hon. member provides some continuing comedy to the house in his questions. As to the latter part of the question, may I say that I am unaware of what the hon. minister said. I can only add that last evening he seemed to have complete control of the situation.


Paul Theodore Hellyer: I have a supplementary
question for the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister advise the house whether there has been any change in the policy of

the government since July 6, 1960, when he advised the house as follows:
At no time did I say sole control. I said joint control of Canada as to the use and also as to everything connected therewith. That statement still stands.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I have not the statement before me. I know that at that time a rather lengthy statement was made. I simply point out the fact that since then discussions have continued between the United States and Canada with reference to this matter. It has been a subject that has caused a great deal of division among all the nations within NATO. However, in so far as Canada and the United States are concerned, at the moment there are no immediate discussions.


Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur):: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. It deals with the television program, and it is directed to the Minister of National Revenue in his role as spokesman for the C.B.C. Will the minister ascertain whether a video tape of this program is available so that it can be run again across the country? Both those of us who saw it and many who did not see it would welcome the opportunity of having that entertainment again.


Mr. J. R. Garland (Nipissing):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. I regret I was not able to send him notice. In view of the minister's unwillingness to accept statistics supplied by the dominion bureau of statistics or, indeed, figures from the Minister of Finance, as exemplified during his television appearance last evening, is the minister giving active consideration to setting up his own political bureau of statistics?


David James Walker: I should have made it clear last night, Mr. Speaker, that I thought I was being presented with material from the Martin bureau of statistics, and there is a great difference.



COLUMBIA RIVER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: wish to address a question to the Prime Minister in view of newspaper accounts of a speech made by Premier Bennett in the legislature of British Columbia last evening in which he is reported to have said that he had heard from the Prime Minister to the effect that from now on all was going to go well on the Columbia, that the Prime Minister 26207-1-86
Inquiries of the Ministry had bypassed the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Justice and that they were going to conduct negotiations directly between one another, or words to that general effect.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I wish first, if the house will allow me to do so, to extend birthday congratulations to the hon. gentleman. None of us at our age like to have birthdays. However, this occasion gives an opportunity to at least extend felicitations to one who has been a long time member of the house.
With regard to the question he asked, I can only say that there has been no communication with the premier of British Columbia along the lines indicated, and that there has been no arrangement made for any meeting or any anticipated meeting.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, a moment ago the hon. member for Kootenay West asked me a question arising out of the statement made by the premier of British Columbia that he had received a letter from me on Monday. There was a letter written to the premier of British Columbia, as to all the other premiers across Canada, not in connection with the Columbia river but generally in connection with power transmission. Perhaps I might indicate the subject matter by referring to certain parts of the letter. I stated:
Replies have now been received from the provinces on the subject of a federal-provincial meeting of ministers regarding the problems of the generation and transmission throughout Canada of electric energy. I expect a reply soon from Premier Smallwood but I thought that you would like to know what the other premiers thought of the proposed meeting.
Then I set out the views of the various premiers and went on to say:
In this connection on February 16 I mentioned in the House of Commons that while power development within a province is a matter of provincial jurisdiction, power developments between provinces are of interest and concern to the federal government.
I referred to the proposed meeting in these words:
As most premiers agree that a meeting of ministers along the line suggested is desirable, it would seem to me that such a meeting could be held in Ottawa by mid-March if agreeable to you-I would suggest March 19. I am hoping that the provinces of Newfoundland and Quebec will see fit to join in the meeting.
Then in the latter part of the letter I stated:
Three principal questions will be considered at this meeting. The first will be the general advantages to be derived from the regional and interregional, and in certain circumstances international, intercommunications of electrical facilities. The second will be the principal problems involved in long distance power transmission, and the nature of the steps that might be taken to meet them; the third, the roles which the federal and provincial
1344	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry governments could play in the planning, research and development required in order to obtain the greatest benefit to the provinces and the nation.
That letter had to do with the general proposition of a national power grid.



INQUIRY AS TO PAYMENT BY CHINA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jack McIntosh (Swift Current-Maple Creek):: In the absence of the Minister of Agriculture I direct my question to the Prime Minister. As there has been a great deal of speculation as to whether the government of red China would meet their February payment on the purchase of Canadian wheat, can the Prime Minister inform the house whether Canada is now in receipt of the payment which I believe was due on or about February 22?


John George Diefenbaker: The terms of payment under the long term agreement provided for 25 per cent cash and the balance over a period of 273 days. The first three drafts under this credit arrangement were payable in the latter part of February, and all of them have been honoured on the scheduled date.


George James McIlraith: I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the Prime Minister's readiness to answer for the Minister of Agriculture questions on the subject of the sale of wheat to red China, will he answer the question appearing first on the order paper today under my name?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The question has already been allowed to stand at the request of the government, and it will come up again for consideration in due course.


George James McIlraith: Speaking on the point of order, may I say that my question was whether the Prime Minister would answer. That question has not hitherto been put.


An hon. Member:: No point of order there.


Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: I have a supplementary question I wish to put to the Prime Minister with respect to the sale of wheat to China. In view of his kindly remarks to that government, in which he was obviously supported by his followers, is this an indication that there is an intention of exchanging diplomatic recognition with that nation?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member should not expect an answer on a matter of policy which has been outstanding for such a long time. I fail to see that urgency has arisen suddenly.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
William Moore Benidickson: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Would the minister inform the house as to what leadership he is giving at the moment in the difficult situation involving 110,000 non-operating employees of the C.N.R. and C.P.R. who are in conflict with management with respect to their contractual employment arrangements? Will he indicate whether or not he is proposing to both sides the appointment of a conciliation officer at this time to try to adjust the difficulties, or whether he will accede to the request of the employees that there be a board of conciliation?


Michael Starr: All facilities that are provided under the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act will be at the disposal of those involved in this dispute, and I am giving consideration now to the requests made by both the railways and the employees.


William Moore Benidickson: Will the minister inform the house within a few days of his decision as to the opposing requests that have been made to him?


Michael Starr: I think it would only be proper that I inform the people participating in the dispute first and advise the house afterward.



RAND REPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hédard-J. Robichaud: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys. In view of the statement made in the house nine months ago, on June 1, 1961 by his predecessor, the former minister of mines and technical surveys, to the effect that a formal statement will be issued as soon as it is possible to do so on the report of the interdepartmental committee for study and report upon the probable effect of the specific recommendations of the Rand commission, can the minister advise the house when we may expect such a report?


Jacques Flynn: Mr. Speaker, this problem is still under consideration, and when a decision is reached it will be indicated to the house.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: It takes a long, long time to decide.



PRODUCTIVITY COUNCIL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Walter Pitman (Peterborough):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, but in his absence possibly his parliamentary secretary would take it as notice. Arising out of the announcement that Mr. E. P. Taylor has declined reappointment to the productivity council, can the minister indicate this gentleman's reasons for not accepting reappointment?


Mr. E. L. Morris (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I will take a look at the question and, if it is appropriate, give an answer tomorrow.



PARLIAMENT HILL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works, and I regret not having sent him notice. It is inspired from listening to his broadcast last night and realizing that he can meet nearly every situation. My question concerns the members of the fairer sex who work in this building. In view of the almost impossible condition of the sidewalk at the crossing on Wellington street in front of the parliament buildings, and in view of the apparent inability of the city of Ottawa to provide even one man for one hour to shovel the snow away, will the minister instruct one member of the House of Commons staff to dig a path through the snow so as to make it unnecessary for members of the fairer sex to have their pedal extremities and other adjacent areas saturated?
Hon. D. J. Walker (Minister of Public
Works): Mr. Speaker, I will have to seek the permission of the mayor of Ottawa to encroach on her preserves, but I will be glad to do so.



OLD AGE SECURITY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Murdo William Martin: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. I regret not having time to give notice. In view of a report in the Ottawa Citizen of February 27 that the Canadian National 26207-1-86i
Supply-Forestry
Institute for the Blind in Winnipeg has been forced because of its deficit to increase room and board charges for old age pensioners to $55 from $45 a month, thus still leaving the old age pensioners with only about 33 cents a day, could the minister inform the house of the approximate date when the government proposes to introduce a measure to provide some real old age security and social justice for Canadians?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member's question started out as though it might be bona fide, but it seemed to me that eventually he has lead up to an argument, and I rule his question out of order.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Chown in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY Forest research branch-
635. Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $80,000.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Chairman, there are a number of points I wish to make on this estimate, since it deals with the research branch of the Department of Forestry. The field of forestry has had a number of important reflections or mirrors held up to it in the last few months, starting with the resources for tomorrow conference last fall, and there have been a number of other meetings to which I should like to refer.
My own interest in forestry research stems from a period spent in building a forestry research library at the head of the lakes and the opportunity that gave me for travelling in the field, and for visiting forestry operations in the United States and Canada. Since then, and because forestry means so much to the economy of my own area, it has always been the paramount interest I have had in terms of economics.
The first point to which I should like to draw the minister's attention is the confusion that exists at the present time amongst foresters themselves as to what kind of forestry research we should conduct and what priorities exist. If the minister took part in the resources for tomorrow conference and looked at some of the preliminary conclusions that were drawn by the two workshops there, I think he will acknowledge this. There seemed to be a number of fields which the foresters themselves, plus the other experts associated with them who came to these meetings, were really not sure should be emphasized. The traditional emphasis toward forest fire protection and the protection, you might say, in the field of forest pathology,

Supply

Forestry
were matters that we always had mentioned again and again, despite the fact that many of the younger foresters seemed to feel the emphasis should be much more on the economic problems facing Canadian forestry today.
I should like to draw the minister's attention to the fact that as a result of some questions I asked in the house, sessional paper No. 195 was filed. These questions dealt with a paper given by one of his officials in this particular branch at a joint meeting in Minneapolis of the United States and Canadian societies of forestry. Here I should like to suggest to the minister that if one of his research officers can produce a confusing paper such as this, then we are really in a rather desperate way in economic research at the present time.
I feel I have every reason to be critical of the point of view put forward here. For example, in our particular region the majority of the licences are held by corporations-* I won't say the majority in the area, but the majority of the licences-are held by United States owned corporations. I can think of a number of them such as the Marathon Corporation, which is a subsidiary of the American Can Company; Kimberly-Clark, which controls large limits around Longlac; Ontario Minnesota Paper Company, in the western end of northwestern Ontario, and the Ontario Paper Company, the old offshoot of the Chicago Tribune.
Now, United States ownership of the mills and United States licencees are facts with which those of us who live in the area are very familiar. One of the first points I should like to make is that the experience of the natives, if I can include myself in that term-and I was born there-has been that these corporations in almost every sense are as good employers as the Canadian corporations, or better. This is also true in the sense of accepting responsibility for forestry research and responsibility in the field for such things as planting and general care for regenerative practices. You can hardly find a Canadian organization to match them in that part of the country. Despite the respect I have, for example, for the Abitibi Power and Paper Company and Mr. Ambridge, Abitibi cannot compare with Kimberly-Clark in the responsibility it shows toward its limits, its research and the whole protection of future supply. This, of course, is my opinion.
This officer of the department, Mr. Babcock, spoke at a joint United States-Canadian meeting. He brought up this whole question of the problem of an exporting country like Canada. Finally be had this to say:

It is difficult to evaluate the ultimate effect on the Canadian economy of foreign participation since the variables are extremely complex. It would be incorrect to suggest that this condition is detrimental to the Canadian economy, because regardless of the size and scope of the operations of an international corporation, maximization of profit is its primary concern in the long run. However, it places in the hands of non-residents the basic economic decision making functions for a large segment of the economy.
Decisions with respect to investment, plant location and expansion, purchasing, pricing and marketing all have their effect on the export of goods. These decisions in the hands of foreign based firms may directly affect the competitive position of Canada in world markets through their influence on the proportion of output allocated to foreign markets and the diversification of production for home consumption.
I have read that too quickly for members to appreciate the gist of it, but it seems to me that here is an economist who has a point but he really does not make it. He sets up a number of factors which would militate against the continuation of United States ownership in Canada, but then lets them go by saying, "Well, after all, really what is there to it?" I feel this is a most unfair kind of approach to make to a topic such as this. It would be better to go and say nothing than go and raise issues that you are not going to see through to some kind of conclusion.
I bring up the corporations, first of all, because this gentleman went to Minneapolis and had some things to say that are even more peculiar about trade unions that operate in the pulp and paper industry. He has a section in his speech called "Wage cost spiral". There are such lovely banalities in that section of his speech as this:
Most Canadians will agree that the United States is a most excellent neighbour and a comforting ally.
Then this officer touches on the question of the danger we face by living next to the United States because labour in Canada discovers how well paid labour is in the United States. Labour in Canada belongs to the same unions as do the men working in the woods in the United States. Then he winds up with a little homily to this effect:
Any external factor such as the use of relatively higher wage levels in the United States for labour-management negotiations in Canada, could artificially influence the cost of Canadian production.
Does he really believe this, or why did he bring it forward? I can tell him how this was reported in both Canadian and United States newspapers. The whole emphasis was on the fact that Canadian labour in our woods was looking to United States examples and United States organizations, and had raised wages inordinately high so we were not able to compete as well. I ask the minister whether or not that is the kind of role he feels one of

his research economists should be taking. If the man has a case to make against the relationship of Canadian locals in United States international unions, why does he not make it instead of making this half-baked analysis? My point is, if this is a sample of the economic research that goes on in the minister's department, then no wonder when we have a conference such as the resources for tomorrow conference there is a great deal of confusion in the reports coming forward from the research workshop.
Perhaps I should not cite the report that was put forward in the last journal of the resources for tomorrow conference. I know these things were done in a hurry, and they are very definitely synopses. However, I should like the minister to have a look at pages 18, 19, 20 and 21, containing the recommendations and the points made at these research workshops. I think he will agree that in forestry we have to get away from the idea that research is a good word. Sure, it is an okay word, and everybody loves the word "research"; however, the research has to have some purpose.
I certainly feel that one of the first moves that should be made, as a result of the mix-up in ideas expressed at these workshops, is that these things need to be tied together.
I am not convinced in my own mind that the research being carried on at the present time in the minister's department is really valuable. I can give him an example of this. There was a paper published just the other day relating to skidding practices and how many logs could be brought out in a certain time. This was a fairly expensive study but I ask myself is this the sector in which federal research should be concentrated? What is the Canadian pulp and paper association and its woodland section doing? I know their publications and I would say almost 40 per cent of them deal with just this kind of study. In terms of priorities what is our forestry research division doing in a field such as skidding, taking examples from the Petawawa forestry research station on the length of time it takes to skid? If you are going into this kind of work the place to go into it is on the job.
I would like to suggest to the minister that there needs to be a reappraisal of what kind of research his officials are going to do. I could give him an example from some of the problems we are facing in my area. The whole question relates to two fields, one silviculture and the other logging management. One is the very key question of logging costs. That is fundamental; and the other is the whole relationship of spruce to our pulp and paper industry.
Supply-Forestry
It is very apparent when you talk about forests you do so from either the industrial or the government point of view, and I say this not to cast a slur on any man in any branch, or on the forestry policy of the Ontario government, but it is apparent that every forester is concerned about the way we are cutting our spruce.
The only substantial argument that one can put against this was put just last week by the forester for an Ontario paper, a man named Mr. Bruce Thompson, who read a paper at the meeting of the provincial foresters association for Ontario held in Port Arthur. He indicated that it was not industry's responsibility to worry about research or worry about regeneration, rather it was industry's responsibility to worry about selling and keeping up production and lowering costs.
There has been tremendous confusion in this particular area, and the use of spruce lies right in the middle of it. As most hon. members are aware, in the paper and pulp industry the fundamental ingredients do not have to be spruce, pine, birch or anything like those. It is a question of cellulose. It is a very significant event that Mr. Thompson expressed himself as he did. Why worry about premium kinds of cellulose that you find in spruce, when the chemical engineers can come along and clear up the whole problem? The main point is that as long as you use some kind of wood it will provide you with cellulose. There is the further argument that since poplar and birch are considered inferior species, and they grow much faster than spruce, then it is not wrong to fall back on the chemical engineers and be confident about them, because in the past 10 years the advances in chemical science have led to an increased production of quality newsprint and other papers of all kinds being made from products other than spruce.
Here is an area in which I am positive I am right, either scientifically or economically. At the present time we do not know whether we should be worrying about our spruce regeneration or not. Some companies are, and they are planting millions of trees a year. Other companies could not care less, and argue what is the difference? Surely this is crucial so far as the future of our forests is concerned. We could waken up in 10 or 15 years time and find we have not a substantial area of decent spruce to cut, that we are overcut. I have only to point out the experience we had in the past with white pine, if anyone says this could not happen.
As I said, this is one fundamental question of research which the department should tackle, whether there is any need at the

Supply-Forestry
present time to worry in so far as our newsprint pulp supplies are concerned, and whether we are overcutting spruce and not developing alternatives to spruce. It is my contention that the department should go very far to influence the kind of forestry policy we are ultimately going to get.
The other problem I would like to raise with the minister is fundamental, vitally important and very delicate. That is the question of wood costs and our competition. We in my part of the country are accused of having the highest wood costs in the world. It is said that down in the southern United States you do not need a woods department; all you need to do is carry your woods department around in you back pocket because you have a whole bunch of negro settlers willing to work at very low rates on subcontracts, and because these settlers are impossible to organize they cannot have a higher wage rate.
It is argued that we must compete with this trend, but the argument never seems to be carried directly to its conclusion, although apparently the minister's economist who spoke in the United States went part way. The answer seems to be that Canadian labour working in the woods industry should not be prepared to take any more increases, and cut down in its demands. Now the whole point about this, as any trade unionist knows, is that all the paper companies have found their paper stocks moving in the last few weeks as a result of the dividend which Abitibi declared not so long ago. As a result of the Canadian government devaluing the Canadian dollar, the wood and paper companies in Canada have never had such beautiful balance sheets since 1956 as they have had this year. However, the men who actually start the whole business going, getting the wood to the mills, now want more when they see this happening; yet we have this story going around all the time that our wood costs are too high and that we are pricing ourselves out of world markets, including the United States market.
Is this not a challenge to the researchers? Is this not a problem for the national government to come up with the answer? I would draw the minister's attention to a statement made by the president of Abitibi. He says the logging tax is outrageous. Mr. Ambridge, the president of Abitibi, says world markets have been lost to the woods industry because of the outrageous logging tax. What does the minister's expert tell him about that? Has he any advice on that? What does he say to the Minister of Finance when this subject is brought up? Does his economist tell him that the logging costs are putting us out of

the United States market? It seems to me that these are vital and important questions to ask at this time about our forest research.
I would suggest that the minister has had a magnificent period of quiet in which to take over and assume the responsibilities of his department. He has not had tremendous pressure put on him by this house. He has not had critical pressure put on him. I am not bringing that pressure to bear on him now, but I suggest it is about time for him to crystallize some of these problems, particularly as they relate to forestry research.
The point I would like to underline again is that it has its effects on my region of the country where the dream, like in many other areas interested in the pulp and paper industry, is to have substantial forest communities. I am speaking about the social aspect of forestry, and every trade union leader of intelligence in the industry can tell the minister that we need to get away from the incentive kind of thought. We need to work to the stage where everybody is on a daily rate. All the professional foresters that I encounter tell me that we need to move toward a day rate because this is the way to get responsible cutters in the bush, men who through continuity and through living in a community are going to be more than the standard lumberjack who goes in, makes a big clean up of $75 or $80 a day on occasion for a few months and then goes away for the rest of the year.
I see the Minister of Labour sitting there. I remember that he went to the lakehead and someone told him of the case of a man who made, I think it was $8,000 in six months, and spent the rest of the year drawing unemployment insurance. I do not think this is the standard practice, but those very examples are the kind of things we should like to get away from in our part of the country. We would like to have stable communities in which men work at forestry the whole year round. This would have immense social consequences for good. For example there is the improvement we could put into schools, and the whole social relationship of an area could be shifted and changed.
No one likes the kind of situation where you have 3,000 or 4,000 men either working terrifically hard or walking the streets of Port Arthur or any other northwestern Ontario town. At the present time this is not the responsibility of the federal government except in a very peripheral way, but I do suggest that here is an area of research and an opportunity for leadership that the minister has with his Department of Forestry.
I know there are examples in our own region of what can be done. One of the problems I could point out to the Minister of

Citizenship and Immigration that relates to this question is the fact that we have an indigenous Indian population in the woods, but very few of them work on pulp and paper operations. Why is it that this is so? This is, in a way, their own land, their own forests, and why cannot they get jobs? Why are they not encouraged to work in the forests? Why cannot some liaison be established, not just in one place but in many places so they can fit into the labour field in the forests?
I suggest there is a good example in Kimberly-Clark in Longlac, Ontario, where very strenuous efforts have been made by this company to develop a year round labour force, probably at considerable cost to themselves. Here is almost a pilot project for the minister's research people. They could go in there and see what are the factors that make this work at Longlac. If it can work there, why cannot the other companies follow suit?
I should very much like the minister, in following up these things, to pay a visit to northwestern Ontario and also to the pulp and paper areas of Quebec. I do not mean a visit to the city of Port Arthur or Fort William, but to the towns where actual cutting takes place. I am thinking of places such as Beardmore, Longlac, Geraldton, Caramat, Ignace and similar parts of the country.
I hope the committee will forgive me for becoming so wrapped up in this particular topic, but I must confess that I have a great feeling of exasperation in this field. I have been closely associated with foresters for about eight years. Some of my best friends are working for the provincial government in the fields of research and industrial forestry. I have never met a profession that is so confused as the forestry profession seems to be at the present time. That is why I have perhaps put an inordinate responsibility upon the federal department to give some leadership in this field.
In case those few remarks about the profession of forestry may be taken in the wrong way, I sketched out the reasons for the confusion in an article that appeared in the Canadian foresters professional journal; but in a nutshell they seem to be this. The forester in his professional attitude is concerned with the future. He has to be, because this is the cycle that he is up against in biology. Also the forester, in terms of industry or government management, is up against the annual report and the quarterly dividend. Somehow in the straddle between those two points of view both the idealism and the assuredness of the forester seems to be lost, and as a consequence I can only think of one or two companies in Canada where the professional forester really has the kind of
Supply-Forestry
influence on forest policy that he deserves. One of the things that keeps staving off his movement toward a more responsible position is the very confusion that seems to be raised about goals and objectives.
Coming back to where I started, I cannot think of anything better to confuse objectives and goals than the kind of paper presented in Minneapolis by the economist from the minister's department.


Mr. Rowe:: Mr. Chairman, I have listened with interest to the hon. member for Port Arthur and I am very glad to see such a keen interest in the forestry industry expressed from different parts of this house in the last few years. I speak as one who has no direct interest in management, and very little other interest in the pulp and paper industry at the present time; but for many years I have felt that the dominion government, no matter which party was in power, failed to take the proper interest in this very important and foremost basic industry of our country.
I cannot altogether agree with my hon. friend's remarks, but I am not going to speak of them in a controversial way except to say that I think the department has done a great deal to assist the provinces. After all, the forestry industry is connected with and has been regarded mostly as being the responsibility of the provinces. That is why I think governments here in Ottawa over the years felt that they did not have much to do with the industry.
However, when one considers the revenue the dominion government receives directly and indirectly from the great pulp and paper industry of this country, I think a very small proportion of it has been contributed back to the provinces in co-operation with them and for their assistance.
The hon. member has mentioned an article presented at an international meeting by someone in the Department of Forestry. To my mind this is not of any great significance. Sometimes these papers are well written and sometimes they are not so well written. In fact, I do not think there was anything very wrong with the article that was written. I do not agree that the research should be along economic lines or that the Minister of Forestry should get out into the bush and show them how to drive a logging horse or skid the logs, because there are other fundamental parts and functions that his department could play.
I well remember that our ex-prime minister, the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent, was keenly interested in the pulp and paper industry. I know from personal conversation with him that he also felt his government,

Supply-Forestry
and probably previous governments, did not do as much as should have been done. I do not say this in any political manner except that I compliment the present minister and this government for having done a little more on behalf of the dominion than has ever been done before, and yet not quite enough.


William Moore Benidickson: They have collected more in taxes.


William Earl Rowe: Yes. Well, in better times they always do. I merely mentioned that there are other factors which are basic to the preservation of this great resource. When one considers what is used in the pulp and paper mills and in the lumber mills, and what is still used for firewood, it is rather frightening to realize that there is more spruce, jackpine and timber of different species burnt in this country in forest fires and destroyed by fungus and insects than the entire amount used by the pulp and paper industry. Surely, then, this is the angle that should get first priority.
I know it is difficult for the dominion government, our constitution being as it is, to interfere too much with the administration of the departments of lands and forests in the respective provinces, but I may say it should be just about as possible, constitutionally, to do so as it is to interfere with agriculture. I believe we have only touched the edge of what the dominion government could do and should be doing in this respect, and I am glad the trend is toward co-operation with the provinces in this field.
1 believe the government has in the first year, spent $5 million on assisting the different provinces. In addition, $1,250,000 is to be distributed in the different provinces toward the purchase of fire fighting equipment. I hope there could be a working arrangement with the Department of National Defence so that when these major fires take place prompt assistance could be forthcoming. No one who has ever experienced one of these great fires, such as that which happened last year in Newfoundland and those which occasionally happen in northern Ontario-the district to which the hon. member for Port Arthur has referred-can ever forget it. The destruction is simply tragic: To think that we, collectively, the dominion government and the provincial governments, should allow an annual destruction in these rich black forests of more acreage than is used in all the pulp and paper industries in Canada!
We hear people worrying about the amount of timber that has been consumed by the pulp and paper industries. I was glad to hear the hon. member for Port Arthur compliment the United States companies who

have subsidiaries here in Canada. I know most of these companies very well-Kimberly-Clark and many others he has mentioned. I have no brief for any particular company, but I cannot think the hon. member is entirely impartial when he criticizes the company in his own district-the Abitibi company-for not being as up to date in every respect, particularly in connection with research, as any of the companies to which he referred. I think that there are many fine companies in the country, and one of the finest is the great Abitibi company which, of course, gives employment to many people. It is fair in its treatment of labour, as the Great Lakes Company and other companies have been, and I think Kimberly-Clark and its subsidiaries have carried out a great deal of research and are to be complimented for it. However, from the nature of this great industry and of the constitutional responsibility shared by the different governments, provincial and dominion, it is difficult to see how the dominion government can fit in today and exert as much influence as the industry might warrant.
Nevertheless I do believe that a great deal more could and should be done in co-operation between the federal and the provincial departments. I compliment the minister on the steps which have been taken along this line and I hope they may continue. I trust that more money will be spent in this direction, if only on roads connecting the forests of the different provinces because, after all, there is no better way to lay the basis of a sound protection against fire, fungi and insects than to have access roads through these great timber areas.
People speak about the pulp and paper industries and the amount of timber they use. They accuse them of cutting down the trees and ravaging the forests, thinking about nothing but profits. May I remind the committee that the pulp and paper industry is, generally speaking, across Canada, only earning between 3 and 5 per cent on the money it has invested? As I say, I have no brief for the Abitibi company and I mention it because it is a company with which I have no connection; in fact it might be said I was competitive with it. The hon. member was worrying about the men who are working for that company and about the other pulp and paper workers and bushworkers in Canada. I would remind him that they are among the highest paid workers in the world. I notice the hon. member did not say anything about the 33,000 shareholders, 75 per cent of whom are small shareholders. In fact, over half the shareholders might well be widows, retired school teachers, retired professional people, or retired members of parliament, even, who might have a few dollars invested. I would

venture to say that the holdings are a great deal smaller on an average than the amount of investment it takes to employ one labouring man.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Would the hon. member permit a question? Is he assuming from my remarks that I was critical of the Abitibi company, aside from the research program?


William Earl Rowe: No.


Douglas Mason Fisher: That was what I was criticising in connection with Abitibi and I should like to make the point clear.


William Earl Rowe: I understand. I only mentioned the Abitibi company as an example. I might well have taken the whole industry. I am in no way inferring that the hon. member was critical of the company's attitude either to the men or to the shareholders, except that he did mention it was less efficient in some respects, with regard to research and so on, than some of its United States competitors.


Douglas Mason Fisher: My comments were specifically related to research. I am the first to recognize that among the pulp and paper companies the Abitibi company for various reasons is the most popular company to work for.


William Earl Rowe: I am glad to hear the hon. member's opinion on that, though I might be prepared to offer him an argument on it. But I am glad he has cleared up his position in respect of the Abitibi company. I am speaking in generalities. I do not want the hon. member-


Douglas Mason Fisher: I am not scared of the president of Abitibi, Mr. Ambridge; but I am not going around lambasting him either.


William Earl Rowe: I know Mr. Ambridge is not scared of you, either.
It takes much work and effort to build up a great industry such as the pulp and paper industry and again I compliment the government on the steps they have taken to assist in this direction. I hope these efforts will be given encouragement by all hon. members in the future.
I can well recall a time in this parliament when practically nothing was spent by the federal government on the great pulp and paper industry, despite the revenue which came into the coffers of the dominion government for so many years. Again I suggest there is tremendous research work to be carried out with reference to destruction caused by insects, fungi and fire. So far as reforestation is concerned, practically every important company in Canada is doing a great deal. The hon. member for Port Arthur shakes his head but I should like to tell him that
Supply-Forestry
independent of what any of the companies may be doing there is a great misconception with regard to what can be achieved by assisting in reforestation. I have tramped through the bush a good many times over the years in which I was more closely interested in and responsible for this big industry. I have seen areas which will not have on them, it is true, for fifty years after it is cut down, wood which is fit to cut again. However, in some areas I myself have counted ten times as many little spruce growing up as spruce trees that were cut down. The most advanced and most educated silviculture scientists today, while they differ a great deal, believe that our general natural reproduction, if it is protected from fire, will amount to between 85 per cent and 90 per cent generally right across the board.
Trees are just like other products that grow. A few years ago some hon. members asked about this matter. I remember one hon. member asked why the pulp and paper industries and the lumber industry should be allowed to go into the forests and cut them down. I might ask some of my friends from western Canada a similar question. When they have miles of beautiful golden wheat that looks so beautiful from the aeroplane or from the train, why cut it down when it is ripe and ready to harvest? It is cut because the next crop will come on. Our forest industry is somewhat the same. When the trees are ready to cut and there is a market for them, they should be cut. They should be taken as a crop. The difference is that it takes from 60 to 70 years to grow a spruce tree and it probably takes fewer months to grow a crop of wheat, probably six months.
On the other hand, as has been mentioned, research is now being carried out no doubt by the companies. Lowering the costs of production is of vital importance in ever growing competition throughout the world. That is something that is always changing. The competition today in the world is entirely different from what it was a few years ago. There is competition from the Scandinavian countries and, though not as well known, from Russia. I have heard it said that there is not much competition from Russia because their streams run the wrong way and that when they freeze up it is impossible to drive. That is all very fine. However, I have seen some of the most beautiful pulpwood in the world come in at different seasons of the year from Russia in years past for far less than our cost of production. It was better trimmed and peeled and was in beautiful shape. Hence, we have competition in that regard. Any research that can be done in order to cheapen production is all to the good.

Supply-Forestry
I know that a few years ago many companies had three times as many men in the bush as they have now. Many companies had as many as 1,000 teams and some of them had 2,000 teams of horses drawing out pulp-wood, or skidding, which the hon. member mentioned this afternoon. Now some of the same companies have not any horses at all and one third the number of men are moving out the wood. The same thing is happening in general automation, as a result of mechanical advancement, in agriculture and other basic industries.
The hon. member mentioned chain saws. I can remember when the boast used to be made that if a man was strong enough he could, with a bucksaw, cut three cords to four cords of wood a day. Now two smart fellows going through university can take a chain saw and, as my hon. friend knows, can sometimes produce as many as 30 cords a day. Such is the march of progress.
I hope that we shall have a new look at the possibilities of protecting these great virgin forests. We have tremendous forest resources in this country. We are blessed with forest resources such as few other countries have ever been blessed with. The hon. member suggests that perhaps we are cutting too much spruce. May I suggest that spruce will grow and will replenish itself just the same as any other trees do. Chemical science is now finding out that just as good paper can be made from many other sources of wood. A few years ago they did not believe that could be done at all. Some assert that in a few years to come many other species of hardwoods will be used just about as widely as spruce is used at the present time.
Again I wish to compliment this government on the fact that, along with the other things they have done, they have a forward look with regard to the forest industry. I may say that at the present time I think they are looking as far into it as they feel it is constitutionally possible in order to assist this great industry to perpetuate itself and to protect it from fire, insects, fungi and so on. May I suggest that I believe they are on the right road, in the first place with respect to access roads to these regions. We have virgin forests that are not accessible to the present mills. In the next quarter of a century these forests will no doubt have mills in their midst. In the meantime, with access roads from one province to another into these districts in order to protect them when the forests are struck by lightning and fires are started or are infested with fungi, budworms and other insects which destroy the trees, these forests can be accessible through these roads.

While I personally think we have waited a long time to play the proper part in cooperating with the provinces in assisting the forest industry, again I wish to compliment the government for going as far as they have gone in the plans they have for greater support of and co-operation with the provinces in the future. I leave this thought with you, Mr. Chairman. I believe the features they are emphasizing are not so much the research that has been done, as mentioned by the hon. member for Port Arthur, in telling the companies how to handle their labour, how to reduce their costs or, in other words on the side of economics-I believe that is their responsibility-but are more in the direction of protection of the virgin forests in the years that are ahead from fire, insects and other destructive forces.


Mr. Flemming (Royal):: At this stage, Mr. Chairman, and before attempting to make any observations in connection with the remarks which have been made by the hon. member for Port Arthur and by the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe, I think it would be of interest if I were to give the particulars as to just where this $80,000 which is at present before us for consideration is being spent. I am sure the Minister of Labour would be interested. It is being spent in connection with the winters work program.
I will give to the committee briefly the general location and the general description of what is being done with the funds hon. members are being asked to vote. In Alberta, at Kananaskis forest experiment station, for cutting rights of way for access roads, clearing existing roads and boundary lines, we are asking for something over $6,200, furnishing 25 man-months of labour. In Manitoba, at the Riding Mountain forest experimental area, for stand improvement cuttings to release young white spruce for aspen overstorey, we are asking for a matter of $2,000. At Petawawa forest experiment station, for cutting rights of way for access roads, clearing boundary lines and plantation fire-guards, clearing and preparing land for planting experimental work, various stand improvement cuttings and thinnings, we are asking for a total of $54,350. In Quebec, at Valcartier forest experiment station, for cutting rights of way for access roads, clearing existing roads and boundary lines, we are asking for a matter of $5,450. The next is the Acadia forest experiment station near Fredericton, New Brunswick, constructing access roads, clearing boundary lines and areas for planting, various stand improvements, cuttings and thinnings, a total of $14,000. There is also an additional amount with respect to

the forest at camp Gagetown. The total comes to the $80,000 requested in the item now under consideration.
It was with great interest, Mr. Chairman, that I listened to the remarks of the hon. member for Port Arthur. I know that he comes from a part of Canada which is noted for the fact that the pulp and paper industry, the forest products industry, if you like, plays such an important role in the general well-being of the area. He has indicated to my satisfaction by his observations that he has given the matter a good deal of careful consideration and has devoted considerable time to a study of the various problems of research and the proper methods or proper activities that should be carried on to improve the forests so that this absolutely renewable resource will be maintained in perpetuity. I appreciate his various observations. I cannot, and neither do I think he would expect that I would attempt to solve all the problems about which he has expressed some misgivings. I assure him and every hon. member that we have a fine group of very capable people in the Department of Forestry who are available to every member of the house and every Canadian citizen for the furnishing of any information that will seem to contribute toward the general well-being of every citizen of our country.
The hon. member has indicated that he has read the report of the resources for tomorrow conference and has also read some of the speeches made by one of the economists in the department, including one speech made in Minneapolis, and that this has aroused within his mind a certain degree of confusion. I am sure he would be the first to agree that undoubtedly in the field of experimentation, and to some degree at least that is what research is, we will always continue to have a certain degree of confusion because if we do not have it, research will not be necessary at all. I assure him that I have heard very capable people argue from diametrically opposite points of view with respect to a question concerning forestry practice. The two gentlemen I have in mind at the moment were very successful in their particular field of endeavour, forestry, but they had absolutely opposite views with respect to research and with respect to methods and the extent to which cutting should be carried on.
In connection with my own business activities, when I was a little younger I remember quite well one man who I believe loved every tree on a particular lot to such an extent that we were never able to persuade him to sell us the stumpage from the lot. Finally, however, he decided to do so but he
Supply-Forestry
was very stringent in laying down the conditions under which we were to operate. Only trees of a minimum certain size and larger on the stump were to be cut and we were to cut them very low. He imposed all these conditions, which seemed to be a very proper attitude for him to take. We carried out the operation and if we hesitated to follow his conditions he saw to it that we did. We carried out his directions to the letter. The logs were cut in the fall. During the following winter there was a terrific windstorm and the trees he had forced us to leave, expecting that they would grow, become larger and be more valuable, so that he could go out and pat them almost every morning, were all blown down.
This may seem to be a somewhat uninteresting little story, Mr. Chairman, but I mention it to indicate that I do not think there is complete unanimity-in fact, quite the opposite-among all foresters and all operators with respect to the manner in which forests should be handled and cut.
I should like to come back for a moment to the field of research. I am the first to acknowledge frankly that my experience in research is comparatively recent. My research was pretty much in the field of practical forestry from the point of view of one who went into the woods at a very early age and worked there for a good portion of his life. Research, both basic and applied, was something in which I had not had too much experience beyond reading articles in magazines and periodicals.
I do think, however, that we might very well consider that we are not going to get all the answers quickly with respect to the problem of the continuation of our forest resources from year to year, but I believe that we are making progress. I believe that we are finding out things every day that we did not know before. I believe that we are getting information concerning the forests and forest management.
At the present time a conference of forest officials from all over Canada is going on in Ottawa, and I was greatly interested in listening to the remarks of the deputy minister when he addressed these people last Monday morning. He spoke to them about the problems of forest management. Then he said, "In connection with your investigation of proper methods of forest management, remember that you should always keep in mind forest management in the broadest sense of the word and it starts with three p's". He was not referring to any front-bench members of the opposition whose names start with "P" but rather to production, protection and processing. He said that forest management in its best and broadest sense

Supply-Forestry
is needed to stimulate these three desirable results, and that is what will contribute a great deal to the general well-being of all our people and the continuation of the industry.
The hon. member for Port Arthur speaks of forest economics. I agree that it would be folly for parliament to vote money for the purpose of stimulating the production of species of trees for which there is no market or which some other country, by virtue of its more favourable situation with respect to production, might be able to produce at a much lower price. We have to acknowledge that in this day and age we are living more and more in one world than ever before, and every day that goes by we find that this is more the case. Whether or not we like it, we do face world competition. Therefore I should like to say to the hon. member for Port Arthur that I believe it is necessary that the economics be studied quite carefully. We must address ourselves to the production of the type of trees which we can produce with some natural advantages and which will be of a sufficiently superior quality that we will not only be able to hold our own but will have an advantage in the markets of the world.
I am sure he would also be the first to acknowledge that in a free country the officials who devote their time to studying certain aspects of forestry such as the economics of it may express opinions during a public address or anything of that nature which might be construed as not being final. I do not believe this is unnatural. I think it is difficult, if not impossible, to arrive at a conclusion with respect to everything. The fact that our aims are brought out into the light, the difficulties presented; the fact that the end result for which we are striving is mentioned, seems to me contributes something to our general knowledge and are somewhat thought-provoking in their application.
I do not believe the hon. member would be too critical of the fact that a conclusion was not reached with respect to the various problems that were mentioned by the gentleman from our department who spoke at the international conference in Minneapolis. In so far as the matter of applied research versus basic research is concerned, how much time should a department devote to basic research? How much time and how much money should the department spend on something that is going to be of benefit 25 or 30 years hence? The hon. member for Port Arthur pointed out that the department used money to tell the operators how to skid logs. I must confess that I cannot become very enthusiastic about that myself. However, I do believe there is

a question to be determined there. I would be the first to acknowledge that I am not certain just what the answer is. I cannot contribute too much to it by way of definition.
I will say, however, to all hon. members that one does not easily forget the habits of a lifetime. In the setting up of the Department of Forestry, I seemed to have the idea that I wanted to refrain from duplicating, at great expense, something which already existed, perhaps in other departments or perhaps in the provinces. If, in the opinion of some hon. members we have been slow, I assure you it is not because of any lack of desire to make progress and contribute something to the well-being of all Canadians, but it is due to the fact we have always had to count the cost of everything before we undertook it. I believe we are nicely on the way, and we are making progress. I think there are many things we are determining from day to day that will be of benefit to the country. In the study of silvicultural methods, forest management and so on, to which I referred in general terms, I think we are making headway.
The hon. member for Port Arthur mentioned the matter of black spruce. Those of us who have been in the lumber business know-and I can see he has given the matter considerable study-that black spruce is a wood of considerable density. We have pulp-mills from Ontario and Quebec coming to New Brunswick looking for black spruce of high density. During the hon. member's remarks he mentioned that today chemists could apply to any kind of wood a chemical treatment that would produce an equally satisfactory basic raw material. But, Mr. Chairman, let me just mention one point, and this goes back to economics again: I am told by the pulp and paper people that a high density spruce will produce 20 or 25 per cent more pounds, more weight, than will the balsam fir, for instance, which we have all over Canada.
To what does this all add up? It simply adds up to this, that the pulp and paper industry, the lumber industry and other industries based on the forests are somewhat complex. However, we are still making progress. Things are being improved. I am one of those who measure improvement by the fact that companies engaged in business are making profit. I am one of those who thinks that profits make good times. I am one of those who believe these extra profits that people have, as individuals and as corporations, all lead to greater expansion and that leads to good times. I am a firm believer in profits. I agree, generally, with the hon. gentleman's observations in connection with

the distribution of these profits. I believe that is a matter which is, generally speaking, taken care of.
I was very much impressed by the remarks of the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe. He mentioned that he had been associated with the industry for a long time and had found that it was possible to stimulate business, to keep it going and do the things that would contribute to expansion. During his remarks the hon. member for Fort William used the expression-Port Arthur, I should have said. I was last spring on a visit to Fort William, and I want to say at this time that the hon. member for Fort William was extremely kind to me. He certainly showed me around the town. I regret the fact that I was not able to call on the hon. member for Port Arthur. I made some inquiries, but he was not in the city at that time.
The hon. member used the expression that we should address ourselves to the general proposition that we should crystallize our problems. In my opinion, that is fine as an objective and we should all strive towards it. I do think it is going to take a prolonged time before we crystallize all problems. We are working towards that end and I am sure that, in his capacity, he is working towards that end also. But I am also sure that everybody within the sound of my voice in this chamber is working towards that end, to crystallize all our problems; but I doubt if we shall achieve that objective in our lifetime. However, it will be a lot of fun trying. That is really what we will get out of life. What we will get is this joy of working and joy of trying, with sometimes a great sense of satisfaction in having achieved something. I am sure that is what we are all striving to accomplish.
I appreciate the comments which have been made in connection with the forestry department and I assure all hon. members that if at any time there seems to be any additional information which they do not want to bring publicly to my attention in this chamber, they would be very welcome to visit the department to the see the things that are being done and get a better view of the general objectives of all the capable staff connected with it.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: As has been stated this $80,000 is to provide a further amount for the operation and maintenance of the forestry research branch of the forestry department. The minister has just explained the purposes for which it is required. It is to provide certain winter works programs in different provinces, which will mean about $57,000 in salaries and wages.
We all know that research in forestry has a different purpose. First of all it is aimed
Supply-Forestry
at protecting our forests, increasing production and, at the same time, helping in the processing of our forestry products. In doing this it also helps the general economy. It improves conditions throughout the country, but it must also provide some assistance, some relief, to those who are more closely connected with the industry.
We understand the Minister of Forestry has some practical interest and very practical experience in this field, but I would like to refer very briefly to one class of people who are interested in forestry, the small farmers who have woodlots of their own and who must derive a living from their woodlots. I am sure the Minister of Forestry is aware of the statement made by the Prime Minister at Rimouski on February 26, 1958, when he stated that a Conservative government would introduce to parliament a new agricultural price support to provide farmers with a higher income. At that time he suggested that wood might also be brought under the protection of subsidies. The Prime Minister's own words were taken down and reported in the Toronto daily Star of February 27, 1958, as follows:
I hope, and representations have been made, that the advisory committee and the stabilization board (which will administer the act) will give consideration to including farmer-produced woods so they will know the lowest prices they will receive a year in advance.
I am sure the Minister of Forestry knows what the Prime Minister meant when he made that statement.


William Moore Benidickson: The northern Ontario farmers thought that.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: A few minutes ago the hon. member for Port Arthur said the pulpwood companies never had it so good. I am not in a position to discuss that statement at this time, but if such is a fact, I would like the Minister of Forestry to tell us why farmer owners of woodlots in New Brunswick have to be satisfied with $9 to $11 per cord for their pulpwood if their wood is so good for pulp products. Of course the Minister of Forestry may say this is a provincial matter. Probably he would be right in saying so but, if such is the case, then I would like an explanation of the statement made by the Prime Minister in Rimouski to the effect that the stabilization board was prepared to give consideration to including farmer-produced woods so that they would know a year in advance the lowest prices they would receive.
We know that up to the present time pulpwood is not one of the nine products which come under prices support, but we also know that the act gave the prices stabilization board wide powers to include other commodities. It

Supply-Forestry
would be interesting to know what the Minister of Forestry is doing to help that class of farmers who need assistance.


Frank Howard: This is an extremely important item even though the amount of money is only $80,000. It is important because of the effect which it could have on our forest industry. I say this because of a degree of personal background in the industry itself in British Columbia, and also because it is estimated that 30 to 40 per cent of the economy of British Columbia rests upon the forest industry, that is, the all inclusive forest industry, the sawmill industry, pulp and paper, logging and the like.
I can appreciate the expression used by the Minister of Forestry to the effect that he did not want to rush full-scale into a huge program of expenditures until there was some assurance that there would not be duplication and that it would be beneficial. What we want to ensure in the field of research, whether it be in forestry or anything else, is that it be done on a regular and planned basis. It would be detrimental to the effectiveness of a research program if the appropriations for it were handled on a sort of hit and miss, feast or famine basis, fluctuating from one year to the next depending upon the sharpness of the red or blue pencil which the Minister of Finance uses. This is especially so in the field1 of so-called pure research as differentiated from applied research. There must be some degree of assuredness of a fairly long period of time, and especially is this so in forestry, so that research projects may be carried on to their conclusion.
We used to have a pretty disgraceful situation in the lumber business in British Columbia when the industry itself did not particularly care whether any trees grew the following year, or 10 years from the time they were logging. In British Columbia there was a policy of clear cutting areas, usually referred to as a policy of cut out and get out. Of course that does not exist any more.
Over the years we have got more and more into the field1 of forestry management, developing sustained yield programs both by way of tenure with private industry and by the establishment of working circles and areas within which there is a limit to the amount of timber that can be cut and logged over a certain period of time. This sustained yield program and concept being relatively new, it brings with it-and certainly this is the view of management operating under what were originally the forestry management licences- some rather complex problems researchwise. It brings out the attempt to understand what is going to happen 50 or 60 years from now or at the conclusion of the rotation period, whatever the period of years might be.

This is something which cannot be entirely dealt with by the research facilities of the forest service in British Columbia, or in any other province for that matter. This, of course, is one of the reasons for the establishment of a federal Department of Forestry, the function of which is to work with the various forest services which exist in the provinces so that these branches will function on a co-ordinating, co-operative basis rather than going in different directions.
It is also a specific problem that I think the federal Department of Forestry should be working toward, and undoubtedly it has started to do this. It should be a matter of specific concern over a long period of time, thus making it possible to estimate how much money might be required in the future for the particular type of research program necessary to deal with the complications and difficulties arising out of our sustained yield or forestry management system in British Columbia. I am sure this is also applicable to other provinces.
I think this sort of thing presupposes that there is a large degree of knowledge available; that it really is the application of that knowledge to a particular problem which is important, and then the problem will be overcome. However, I do not think it is as simple as that. Without trying to put words into the mouth of the hon. member for Port Arthur, I think the idea he was seeking to leave with the committee was that, with so many imponderables, we have to attempt as best we can to ensure that if for the sake of argument, we have a 50, 60 or 70 year rotation period, and 50 or 60 years from now we are going to come back and re-log the area we are logging today, the growth will be at its height at that time so that the combination of each yearly increment of wood will be at the limit. We want to ensure that insect infestations, fungi and the like are kept to a minimum and do not interfere with the growth of that particular stand, and that when it is time to log the area we have the best possible type of wood which is fungus and disease free.
I think in British Columbia this is perhaps as important a question as any, research-wise, with which we should be concerned. This applies to the province in the way of research work undertaken by the forest service, and research work by the industry and the federal Department of Forestry.
In the field of research by private industry I think we must realize, without in any way wishing to be misinterpreted-and I hope nobody misinterprets this as being unkind to industry or to any body else-that the motivating factor behind carrying out pure or

applied research is an economic one. I think we find that the research engaged in by industry is directed more toward a greater utilization of the product, less breakage and the like, so that the product which comes out of the mill contains the greatest volume of wood, and waste, and the like, is cut to the minimum. Private industry is concerned in keeping the cost of producing the unit of wood, or pulp or paper, whatever it is, to a minimum. This is the prime field of research in which private industry becomes involved.
Unfortunately we have found that the forest service in British Columbia has in years past not engaged to the extent it should have in the field of research. If I may be permitted, Mr. Chairman, I should like to read one or two brief quotations from the report of the royal commission on the forest resources of British Columbia. This royal commission was headed by the late Chief Justice Gordon McGregor Sloan and the report was published in 1956. The report deals with the question of the research activities of the forest service, and I should like to quote from volume 2, page 559. The late Chief Justice says this:
The type of study for which this division is staffed and equipped may be defined as applied research; that is, the application of known principles or procedures to local conditions to which the specific reactions can only be determined by direct experimentation and observation.
Then he goes on:
Research for the sake of knowledge itself and without a practical objective cannot be undertaken with the limited staff and facilities presently available.
Throughout the report there are references by the late Chief Justice to this question of research. Evidence was given by Dr. Orchard, the deputy minister of lands and forests, and other people, to the effect that (1) research is without question one of the most important aspects of a proper forestry program; (2) the provincial forest service had unfortunately up until the time of the commission's report not had sufficient funds at its disposal to deal with this particular question, and in some fields engaged in practically no research whatsoever.
This matter was mentioned by the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe; that is, the fields of insect infestation and diseases. I think this should be one field wherein we should concern ourselves to a very great extent. We all know that the spraying of forests with insecticides can have, and has had in the past, a beneficial effect upon the forest because it destroys certain types of insects which have been infesting particular areas, but it has a detrimental effect upon the fisheries in that area. There is this great conflict of social and
Supply-Forestry
economic interests as between fisheries resources on the one hand, which are detrimentally affected by forest spraying programs, and the forest resources on the other hand, which are beneficially affected by the same program.
I know that a great deal of research has been undertaken in this field by the Department of Fisheries and some beneficial results have been achieved to the point where it is possible to dilute a certain type of insecticide to a degree which will give maximum forestry benefits and minimum detrimental effects to the fisheries. Unfortunately the problem still exists inasmuch as in British Columbia, at least up until four or five years ago according to the report of the royal commission, the money was not available to carry out a proper, thorough and effective type of research in this field.
This is a field in which the federal Department of Forestry can profitably become engaged and be of very great benefit to the industry, to the people who work in it and to the economies of the provinces concerned. The minister indicated that he is going slowly, and understandably so, to ensure that the research programs being put into effect are not being duplicated by other services or departments. The minister said his department is feeling its way in this field and progress is being made. I hope this provision means that in the years to come there will be a large increase in the sums made available for this and similar purposes-I am not restricting this comment to the vote we are considering at the moment, which is supplemental; I have in mind the main estimates, which amounted last year to a little less than $2 million. I would hope that as a result of the interest shown by the minister and the studies which are going on at the moment there will be a large increase in the funds made available for this field so that the foresters and the people working in the research branch of the federal department can become involved in questions of pure research to the fullest possible extent. My own view is that it should be possible to take such items as the clearing of rights of way, which is going on under this vote of $80,000, the effects of cutting and pruning and the like, and place them under a separate item for separate consideration because, to me, these are two separate branches of endeavour. One involves pure research and the other the question of the work itself.
As the minister has explained, the work provided for in this vote was not done primarily for research purposes but to provide winter work to assist somewhat in bolstering the economy of this country. If we could

Supply-Forestry
make this distinction between the two different types of activity I do not think any confusion would arise about the purpose of the work being done by the research branch of the Department of Forestry. I do not think there is confusion about the approach we might be making in the provision of research, but I think at the present time there is confusion about the end which is sought by the research branch of the department.
I have nothing further to say at this time. I note that this a supplementary estimate, and it is kind of the committee to be so courteous as to allow not only myself but other members who have participated in the debate to stretch their remarks perhaps beyond the strict confines of the vote now under consideration.


Mr. Carter:: We have had a most useful and interesting debate on this item. Although the amount involved is relatively small, the subject is an important one. I think that when there is a limited amount of money available for research it is wise that we should establish priorities. I think everyone will agree with the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe that priority should be given to the elimination of the wastage of our forest resources by fire, insects and disease. Next to that, I hope, will come some research which will enable us to reap the harvest of mature trees while they are still marketable and before they become rotten and useless windfalls which is the case to a large extent in the forests of my own province.
Forestry is, of course, a most important industry in Newfoundland because timber is perhaps the most important prop in our economy. We already have two papermills and we hope arrangements can be worked out to support another. I should like to bring the minister's attention to another area of research which has not been mentioned and which, perhaps, is not of great interest to the paper industry. The area of research I have in mind, and one which is beyond the resources of the provincial authorities, is the question of forestry and reforestation as a means of soil conservation and soil formation. This question is of tremendous importance to my own riding. Hon. members will understand that most of the settlers in my riding as well as in most of the coastal settlements of my province were settled two or three hundred years ago. The early settlers, our forefathers, knew nothing about the importance of conservation measures or even about the relationship between the preservation of trees and the preservation of the soil. Because of this lack of knowledge they cut down the nearest wood to them to build
their houses, their boats, their flakes for drying fish and their fuel. As a result there was tremendous erosion of soil all along our coast line.
The provincial government realizes the importance of woodlots and the supply of wood to the fishermen. It set out a limit on crown lands-a limit three miles from the coast line-within which timber would be available to supply the needs of our fishermen. But, as I have indicated, not only have these limits been denuded but the soil itself has deteriorated to a great extent. The situation thus created is one which deserves attention and we should consider whether it is possible to develop a type of tree capable of repopulating this area and at the same time starting a process of soil formation.
This little limit was of great importance to the small mill owners in my riding and represented an important factor in the economic life of these communities. I hope the minister will find it possible to give some attention to the problem which I have outlined although I recognize it may not appear to be a great one compared with the size of the pulp and paper industry.
May I call it five o'clock?
Mr. Pallet!: All day on one item of supplementary estimates.
Item stands.
Progress reported.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: It being five o'clock the house will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely, notices of motion and public bills.



ADVERTISING


Mr. J. C. MacRae (York-Sunbury) moved:: That a special committee be appointed to carry out a survey of all aspects of commercial advertising on Canadian television and radio, in certain newspapers and other fields of mass communication, for the purpose of recommending what steps, if any, should be taken to prevent the distribution of fraudulent and misleading advertising to Canadian consumers;
That the said committee consist of fifteen members to be named at a later date, nine of whom shall constitute a quorum;
That the said committee be empowered to send for persons, papers and records; to sit while the house is sitting; to report from time to time; and to print such papers and evidence from day to day as may be ordered by the committee and that standing order 66 be suspended in relation thereto.
He said: Mr. Speaker, while the majority of advertisers, manufacturers and retailers are completely and entirely ethical in this country,

there are still far too many who are selling rubbish by false suggestion, by half-truths, and by words carefully chosen to mean nothing when they are challenged in a court of law. If, for example, we take an old magazine, let us say one of 50 years or so ago, the advertisements in them seem ridiculous to us; I refer to the advertisements and the claims that are made therein. However, somehow or other, we do not seem to feel this way about a current magazine, a television commercial or a radio spot. Many of them are just an insult to our intelligence.
In the dark ages of the art, advertising literally got away with murder. According to history, it was not unknown for an advertiser to exploit a nostrum offering to stop a baby's crying. Apparently that claim was valid for, after swallowing certain of these concoctions, some babies never cried again. Various rugged individuals were induced by advertising to search for symptoms of dire diseases. Sick folks were persuaded to trifle with major maladies. Consumers were educated to consume nonsensical compounds or deadly poisons or habit forming drugs.
Then, as now, the bulk of Canadian business was sound and reputable. Interspersed were the pirates. Some of these freebooters used advertising to further outrageous exploitation of their victims. Such advertising ran all the way from murder, manslaughter and other crimes through felony and misdemeanor to misrepresentation and misleading tricks. However, actually these old ruffians became playful at times. There is the legendary figure of the advertiser who offered at some alluring price "complete sewing machine, all charges prepaid" for $3.95. When the victim received an envelope in return for his money, if he did not open it very carefully he got stuck a second time, for in the envelope was a needle. That was the complete sewing machine.
When business became slack, it was stimulated by fresh offers. If legend is correct, there was the advertising of "Beautifully framed: Genuine steel engraving of Queen Victoria for only a dollar." What the sucker in this case received was a postage stamp. It was a steel engraving; it was Queen Victoria, but the one who got beautifully framed was the purchaser himself. I think perhaps I may be pardoned if I mention another illustration. We all know the old story. Years ago there was advertised a complete killer of potato bugs for $1. It was stated that if you sent $1 in you would get the necessary ingredients to kill all the potato bugs in a 10-acre field. What you received when the parcel came were two blocks of wood with the instructions that, of course, if you placed a potato bug between the two blocks, they
Request jor Commercial Advertising Survey certainly would kill that potato bug and all the rest, as well. That is an old story and it is supposedly true.
Today the majority of advertisers-and I cannot stress this enough-are high grade organizations of responsibility and integrity. In its lower fringes, however, advertising is still smeared with much that is definitely unfriendly to consumers. Periodically the shysters get too bold. There are "crime waves" in advertising as there are in other activities. Fraudulent and misleading advertising shatters the public's confidence in publicity. Consumers then become less responsive to all advertising. Apparently there will long be a continued need for clean-up campaigns to give the truth-in-advertising movement another forward surge. Fortunately, much of the ground thus gained is held. The long pull trend of advertising honesty appears to be gradually upward. Therefore, a discussion of misrepresentation in advertising should not -and I hope that my remarks will make this clear-smear advertising as a whole. Consumers can help both themselves and reputable business by continuing to use their influence against shysters.
Today in this country one of the most active groups is the Canadian association of consumers, a group of women who are banded together across all of Canada, and who are trying to protect the consumer in so many different ways. I have had a number of discussions with their president, Mrs. Plumptre, here in Ottawa, and others who have pointed out various attempts by advertisers to mislead.


William Moore Benidickson: Such as sliced bacon camouflaging.


John Chester MacRae: Yes. That is the kind of thing referred to. What legislation have we now? First of all, there is the Combines Investigation Act, section 33C (1) which reads as follows:
(1)	Everyone who, for the purpose of promoting the sale or use of an article, makes any materially misleading representation to the public, by any means whatever, concerning the price-
And I stress again "the price".
*-at which such or like articles have been, are, or will be, ordinarily sold is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
But again, Mr. Chairman, please listen to this. Subsection 2 reads as follows:
(2)	Subsection (1) does not apply to a person who publishes an advertisement that he accepts in good faith for publication in the ordinary course of his business.
This particular section of the Combines Investigation Act was recently tested in Toronto. I am sure that hon. members recall the case very well as it was the first case in which a firm by the name of Eddy Black was

Request for Commercial Advertising Survey prosecuted under nine counts of misrepresentation as to price, was convicted under nine counts and fined. The magistrate at that particular point said that the reason the fines were not heavier was that it was the first testing of the law. In fairness I must say that the company has indicated that they may appeal. I am not sure whether they have done so. However, the Combines Investigation Act refers only to price, and this idea, of course, where they advertise a selling price of $5 and that the suggested retail price is $15 but the article is really worth only $5 in the final analysis.
The Criminal Code, section 306, is also pertinent. It reads as follows:
(1)	Everyone who publishes or causes to be published an advertisement containing a statement that purports to be a statement of fact but that is untrue, deceptive or misleading or is intentionally so worded or arranged that it is deceptive or misleading, is guilty of an indictable offence-
Subsection 2 states as follows:
(2)	Everyone who publishes or causes to be published in an advertisement a statement or guarantee of the performance, efficacy or length of life of anything that is not based upon an adequate and proper test of that thing, the proof of which lies upon the accused, is, if the advertisement is published to promote, directly or indirectly, the sale or disposal of that thing, guilty of an offence-
But again subsections 1 and 2 do not apply to a person who publishes an advertisement that he accepts in good faith for publication in the ordinary course of business.
Finally, as to legislation, we have the Food and Drugs Act. A very fine article was published within this last few months in the 1961 Canada Year Book. The article was written by Dr. C. A. Morrell, director, food and drug directorate, Department of National Health and Welfare, Ottawa. I should like to quote some things he said because it seems to me they are extremely pertinent.
The present Food and Drugs Act is a federal statute with provisions applying to the manufacture, advertising, packaging-and this is what we are discussing now-sale of food, drugs, cosmetics and medical devices anywhere in Canada. There are no similar provincial laws. It seems to me that is one of the weaknesses in our system as to legislation.


William Moore Benidickson: They have no jurisdiction in criminal affairs.


John Chester MacRae: That is so. This federal law exists for the protection of the consumer. Food and drug legislation of some kind has been known in the world for centuries. The first Canadian law of general scope was "An Act to Impose Licence Duties on the Compounders of Spirits and to Prevent the Adulteration of Food, Drink and Drugs". It was passed in May 1874 and became effective

on January 1, 1875. In this act the present Food and Drugs Act had its origin. There have been many minor and several major amendments to the law since 1874, the most recent one being passed in 1953. The original law was the first such law of national scope in North America, and there has been continuous enforcement since 1875.
Here are the powers and scope of the national Food and Drugs Act. There is authority provided (1) to establish standards of composition or identity for foods, drugs and cosmetics; (2) to prohibit the sale of foods that are dirty or harmful; (3) to prohibit the sale of drugs manufactured under unsanitary conditions or that are adulterated; (4) to provide standards for all drugs; (5) to require licences for certain biological preparations; (6) to prohibit the sale of harmful cosmetics or those made under unsanitary conditions; (7) to prohibit the sale of harmful medical devices and, (8)-this to my mind is a very important one-to prohibit the advertising, labelling, packaging or processing of foods or drugs "in a manner that is false, misleading or deceptive or is likely to create an erroneous impression regarding its character, value, quantity" and so on.
The act has a clause that prohibits the advertising of any food, drug or cosmetic to the general public as a treatment, preventative or cure for a number of serious diseases and also lists drugs that may be sold only on prescription.
The Food and Drugs Act is a part of criminal law and it lays down standards and other requirements that will minimize health hazards and fraud in the sale and use of these products. It outlines areas of responsibilities for the manufacturers and distributors but it does not guarantee that drugs will meet the quality standards that are expected of them.
The Food and Drugs Act contains clauses and sections with respect to advertising. It is illegal to make false, exaggerated or misleading claims about a drug or to create an erroneous impression as to its composition, character, value, quantity, merit or safety. The work of enforcing this section is considerable since the advertising of drugs is very extensive. Control of advertising is limited to that directed at the general public.
With all these factors in the legislation you may ask whether we are not protected sufficiently. It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that we do have adequate legislation. I am not a lawyer by profession and perhaps not as well versed in the statutes of our country as some of our legal members, but it seems to me that we do not have the necessary

regulations. There are a number of other members who wish to speak and perhaps they will be able to deal with that aspect.
The other day when the postmaster general of the United States was here he held a press conference. He was asked about the problem of advertising by means of television and radio. Evidently they have the same problem in the United States that we have here. I have complained many times about the fact that we are flooded with television advertising from the United States, much of which seems to me to be in bad taste, much of which seems to be misleading. In some cases the advertising in their magazines is terrible. We do not hear so much about radio advertising in the United States perhaps because we do not listen to their stations.


William Moore Benidickson: Oh, yes, we do. The C.B.C. takes it in big quantities.


John Chester MacRae: I do not think what Mr. Day said in his remarks to the press was reported in any newspaper because I searched for it and could not find) it. He said that the situation with regard to radio stations was so bad in the southern states that they actually chased the people concerned right out of the country. However, what they did was to go to Mexico and from there they beam their advertising and progaganda particularly at the southern states, which has created quite a problem.


William Moore Benidickson: The C.B.C. gets more revenue from United States programs than it does from Canadian.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


John Chester MacRae: Mr. Speaker, I should like to discuss two or three cases that are very much in point. One is the recent Colgate-Palmolive case in the United States. In their television advertising the shaving of sandpaper was depicted. I will not discuss that further. I know that my seatmate, the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. McCleave), would like to discuss that one. He has had experience in the fields of radio and journalism, and this is a very interesting case.
I might point out the difference with regard to control between Canada and the United States. In the United States the policing body is the federal trade commission, and under the Clayton act and its amendments it seems to me they are doing a magnificent job. There is another aspect which I hope will be discussed this afternoon. I have the material here to do so but because my time is limited I shall leave it to others. I refer to the matter of the advertising and the sale of vitamins to a gullible Canadian public. I hope that two or three hon. members who are doctors will discuss that matter in full. It seems to me that Canadians are being bilked of millions
Request for Commercial Advertising Survey of dollars every year by this racket, and in my view it is nothing but a racket. If a person has a well balanced diet, and almost everyone in this country knows what a well balanced diet is, there is no need for all these vitamins. They are simply swallowed and the system does not absorb them, but people are spending millions of dollars on them every year.
Dr. Monagle, chief of the nutrition division of the federal health department, discussed this matter fully when he addressed the Canadian fruit wholesalers association. If hon. members are interested in this point I would be most happy to discuss it with them.
There is another racket which we have not yet encountered in Canada but which is very prevalent in the United States. It has to do with fall-out shelters. We can expect the same thing to happen here soon because it seems to me we are on the brink of annihilation unless we learn to live with one another. People are beginning to think of their preservation more than ever. It has been noted that in the United States manufacturers of fall-out shelters have been using the fear of people in order to mislead them. I have here a list of 15 different actions on the part of U.S. manufacturers of fall-out shelters for which they have been castigated. They include the making of false or misleading statements, false implications, the use of pictures that give a false impression of the product, down payments that are made to appear as the entire price, phony guarantees, false indications of official government endorsement, claims that the product is custom made, bait advertising, sales promotions involving lotteries, scare tactics and so on. These are things that might be used with regard to almost any product one can name. There are many other practical cases but I do not think I have too much time left. The other day in the Ottawa Journal there was a "Brother Juniper" cartoon. I do not know how other members feel about these cartoons but I get a great deal of enjoyment out of the little fellow. In this one he is talking to one of the other brothers and he is saying:
How come they're always putting new ingredients into toothpaste? Why don't they just put in toothpaste?
I think that is a very sensible idea.


William Moore Benidickson: Instead of towels in breakfast food.


John Chester MacRae: Towels in packages of detergents. The hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River (Mr. Benidickson) has brought up a good point. Detergent boxes are half filled with towels and boxes of breakfast food are half filled with plastic gimmicks for children. There are a number of other points I should like to make. There is the brain
1362	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Request for Commercial Advertising Survey washing that seems to be practised on our children in this day and age by means of advertising. I believe the hon. member for Peterborough (Mr. Pitman) has that point in mind and plans to speak about it. Then there is the matter of the built-in obsolescence in so many of our products that we buy.
Finally, I want to say a few words about radio and television. They provide great entertainment for us but I think we have some false standards. We all see television programs for which some sick comic or some fellow who cannot sing is paid perhaps $50,000 to appear on a program and sing a song or two. Then the sponsor has to sell a million tubes of toothpaste to pay him. We see that kind of thing going on whereas on the other hand a man who is making some contribution to this world of ours has to work five years to earn that much money.
It also seems to me that on television and radio-I suppose those concerned will not take this comment kindly-there are far too many commercials. They are too loud and too long. If they could somehow or other be compelled to have their commercials only half as loud as the rest of the program instead of twice as loud I think we would be getting somewhere.
I hope other hon. members will contribute to this debate. I am deeply interested in this matter. I believe there is a place for such a committee to investigate and to act as a watchdog with respect to advertising on television and radio, magazine advertising and advertising in some of the newspapers of our country.


Mr. Phillips:: Would the hon. member permit a question?


John Chester MacRae: Surely.


Orville H. Phillips: I listened to his remarks with a great deal of interest and I did not want to interrupt him. Does he realize that if his objection to fraudulent advertising were to apply to political campaigns, the opposition parties could not advertise during the campaign?


John Chester MacRae: That is realized.


Walter George Pitman: I will try to return the debate to more serious matters, Mr. Speaker. I rise to support the resolution of the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. MacRae). I think it is a good resolution. I agree with the method of setting up a special committee of this house. I think that the House of Commons should and can be an educational device by means of which we could scrutinize certain aspects of our society which need scrutiny. This is a sensible and moderate solution. There is no precipitous

action suggested-simply a desire to acquire information. If we look below the border, we will see how special congressional committees have done a job in examining crime and various other aspects of American society about which a certain amount of concern is felt.
Then, too, I think this is the right place to be dealing with this matter at the federal level. At one time, of course, we believed that the government had no right to interfere in these matters. Today there are very stringent federal controls in the area of food and drugs to which the hon. member has already referred. We also saw the Combines Investigation Act amended two years ago to include definite control of certain areas. I will not read that as it has already been read. Certainly we in this group have constantly encouraged greater concern by the federal government in this area of advertising. If one reads the record of the banking and commerce committee for 1960, he will find there attempts by members of the C.C.F. group to introduce amendments to the Combines Investigation Act to deal with the problem the hon. member has brought forward.
We are very happy, therefore, to see other political parties are now concerned with this matter of advertising. We are all very greatly impressed with the work of the Canadian association of consumers. They cannot be praised too highly. Of course, it is a private organization and its work is limited by a lack of funds. Advertising is very big business and has no need for more funds. One may look at the general area of advertising and say it has grown out of all proportion to its importance in our society. At one time, advertising was considered to have an informative role; it was to give information about products. Today, with our Madison avenue techniques joining forces with psychology and the hidden persuaders about which we have heard so much, it is a force in our society with which we need to concern ourselves.
Those of us in this house who are concerned about democracy I think must realize that democracy is based upon the ability of men and women to make a free choice. This house must concern itself with any activity that might undermine that freedom of choice. When a medium may be used to divert or damage the kind of democratic society we are creating, then this house certainly has reason to be concerned. We protect people physically from poisons, from bad food, and it may be that we should protect them from mental and spiritual injury as well. Some people may see this as an affront to freedom and say that a man can use his money as he wishes. I say, no. The techniques of modern advertising may very well be a threat to the kind of

society which we in this house are seeking to build. The state must often put on controls to protect that freedom.
We have talked a great deal about freedom of the individual, and this is an area in which we can protect that freedom. Today, of course, advertising has become more and more complex. It was very easy to tell the various types of textiles in the early days. They were either wool or cotton. Today, however, with the synthetic textiles like dacron, nylon and so on, it is very difficult to identify these textiles and the public can be easily misled. I think, therefore, this is a very important resolution, and one which should receive the attention and concern of this house. I do not think I need to indicate the number of areas in which we have seen false and misleading advertising. We have seen it, perhaps, in its most pernicious form, in the area where our young children are concerned. We have seen television programs containing advertising designed to give young children certain ideas by means of which they can put pressure upon their parents. We have seen various methods by which the young people of our country have been used in order to create future markets for these particular products.
The hon. member for York-Sunbury mentioned the whole area of fallout shelters. One could mention a lot of other areas as well, such as toothpaste and cigarettes in which the advertising has been misleading and false. Finance companies which advertise the advantages of borrowing from this company as compared to that are certainly not in any sense guided by the truth. We agree that most of the manufacturers and retailers in this country do not need to be controlled by this kind of legislation. However, there are always a few and, in a sense, we have to protect the ethical businessman from the unethical businessman with this kind of legislation.
I do not wish to take up any more time. There are other members who wish to speak. In conclusion, I would say that all parties here are concerned with the individual and the sanctity of the personality. We may differ on how that personality is to be protected and given a greater opportunity. I think this resolution is an important one, and I think it should commend itself to this house.


Mr. R. J. McCleave (Halifax):: I join this debate in the life-long hope that brand X will some day triumph on television; that brand X shirts will turn out to be whiter; that brand X baseball, football or hockey team will beat the New York Yankees, the Winnipeg Blue Bombers or the Montreal Canadiens. I also have a sneaking longing to see Joel Aldred cough some time in the middle of a cigarette commercial, to see a housewife who still has a look of
Request for Commercial Advertising Survey anguish on her face from indigestion after using some form of seltzer and, finally, to see the people who jump about so spiritedly on the beer ads, lurch or perchance even fall down. Of course, these things are not possible under the myth or fiction of present advertising.
First, sir, may I list some of the problems as I see them. These are my suggestions for solutions which are in accord with the very fine resolution of the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. MacRae). I shall also try to be as brief as the last speaker because I realize that a great number of people wish to make a contribution to this most interesting debate.


William Moore Benidickson: No, a great number of people want to have this motion carried.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Robert Jardine McCleave: The first problem is the use in advertising of such words as, "most doctors recommend"; or, "three out of four baseball players use"; or, "four out of five housewives prefer". This is the sort of advertising which appears to be making a factual statement but, none the less, to the uninitiated, will have its appeal.
Then, may I turn to the second problem which is connected with advertising in the visual field. I am thinking of recent golf matches which a television crew had tried to cover in some far-off part of the world. The crew came back but found that part of their film was missing. They had to take the star out to simulate some of the shots. This, of course, was in the realm of fiction, although it really did not alter the outcome of that particular golf match.
Then, the third problem is the T.V. actor who sips coloured water instead of whisky, which is probably to his advantage.
The fourth problem is the quality of detergents, in which shirts are shown whiter than white, or whiter than brand X washed shirts, and sometimes you find that these are actually blue shirts because on television blue shirts photograph whiter than white shirts. Still another problem arises from the food freezer scheme.
A further problem which arose in the United States very recently concerned a shoe company which said its shoes would correct, prevent and relieve a large variety of ailments. I list some of them as indigestion, stomach ulcers, high blood pressure and arthritis, which is quite a claim for any shoe company to make. However, it was persuaded to tone down these rather high-flown claims to a simple statement that its shoes would give relief only for hip pains, swollen joints and ankles.

Request for Commercial Advertising Survey
Yet another type of problem arose very recently when one large company was giving away a fruit bowl as one of its premiums. It stated that if you sent in so many box tops, or what have you, you would receive this very large glass bowl for holding fruit. It was actually an eight inch bowl which would not hold many bananas, apples, grapefruit or oranges, but the advertising agency substituted a 12 inch glass bowl in its pictures which, of course, would hold that much more fruit and bring that many more suckers into the field to obtain that type of bowl.
Then there is the puzzling case of the advertiser who was left speechless. This was the Gillette Safety Razor Company, to which we all owe a debt in the fall of the year when they bring us the world series. It had been seeking the superior razor blade and, by golly, it did turn up with the superior razor blade, one that could live up to just about any claim you could make for long life and the quality of shave it gave. The company looked hard for words to describe this marvel but over the years it had already used all the words in the English dictionary to describe less superior products.


William Moore Benidickson: You promised to be brief and let us have a vote.


Robert Jardine McCleave: The company finally settled on a simple statement that their new blade was indeed the best for shaving.
The hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. MacRae) mentioned that I would probably be dealing with a recent case in the United States involving the Colgate-Palmolive Company which was found guilty of misrepresenting a rapid shaving cream. Perhaps most of us have seen the television commercials already. The cream is applied to sandpaper and then the whole thing wiped off very quickly. However, in actual fact the federal trade commission in the United States found that the purported sandpaper was a sheet of plexiglass to which sand had been applied. Some of the reasoning in their judgment is of extreme interest to this debate initiated by my hon, friend, and so I would like to put it on record. This was a unanimous ruling by the federal trade commission and the gist of the ruling was that television camera trickery must not be used in demonstrating the qualities of a product offered for sale. The ruling accompanied a commission order against Colgate-Palmolive Co., and its advertising agency, Bates and Company, Inc., of New York city, prohibiting them from falsely advertising shaving cream, and from using spurious or false mockups or demonstrations for any product. The commission declared:
The limitations of the television medium may present a challenge to the creative ingenuity of

copywriters; but surely they do not constitute lawful justification for resort to falsehoods and deception of the public. Any argument to the contrary would seem to be based on the wholly untenable assumption that the primary function of television is to sell goods, and that the commission should not make any ruling which would impair the ability of sponsors and agencies to use television with maximum effectiveness as a sales or advertising medium.
Stripped of polite verbiage, the argument boils down to this: where truth and television salesmanship collide, the former must give way to the latter. This is obviously an indefensible proposition. The notion that a sponsor may take liberties with the truth in its television advertising, while advertisers using other media must continue to be truthful, is patent nonsense. The statutory requirements of truth in advertising apply to television no less than to other media of communication-
In this case the pictorial test of Rapid Shave, proving to any doubting Thomas in the vast audience that "it really could shave sandpaper" was the clinching argument made by the commercials. The "sandpaper test" was conducted as the announcer said, "to prove Rapid Shave's super moisturizing power..." without this visible proof of its qualities, some viewers might not have been persuaded to buy the product. At least, Colgate-Palmolive must have thought so, or else they would not have emphasized the pictorial "sandpaper test" in the expensive television advertisements of their product.
Finally, in this decision of the federal trade commission comes:
One need only consider the difference in the impact of these commercials on viewers had they been told, honestly and truthfully, that what they were seeing tested was a plexiglass mock-up, rather than what they thought and were told they were seeing, namely, actual sandpaper. The difference between telling and not telling the truth, could, in this instance at least, have been the difference between an effective and ineffective "sell". In such circumstances, the claim of "harmless exaggeration" is rather hollow.
I shall leave the record with that very brief statement on the principles applied by the federal trade commission, not only quoted from the standpoint of the grounds of the decision but also to show a little bit of the philosophy that can be brought into this field.
Some hon. members have already suggested that it may be said against the hon. member for York-Sunbury that he has attempted to interfere with the freedom of the press. On that point I would like to say that I do not believe freedom of the press is a licence of the press to be irresponsible. As I conceive it, it is the duty of the press to act within reasonable and civilized limits and not to accept any philosophy which would allow certain people, advertisers for example, to use the press to peddle untruths and half truths which may either be very damaging or partly damaging to the public. However, I do not say that in all the cases I have mentioned one should consider taking action against the advertisers.
In health matters, yes. I think it would be a good idea if the committee envisaged by the hon. member for York-Sunbury could

look at the regulations now dealing with food, drugs and medicines, because these are basic to health and perhaps the present regulations are not strict enough. I think we might also have a look at advertising in connection with many matters. We might also have a look at the problem to see whether sections of the Criminal Code dealing with fraud are strong enough.
Over-all, sir, I would support the resolution. I think its spirit is a sound one and I also think it would be welcomed by the vast majority of publishers, the vast majority of people in television and radio, and probably even by the vast majority of advertising agencies themselves. The honest advertising agency is caught in this position; if he does not stoop to the odd bit of chicanery himself, his unscrupulous rivals, who might stoop to photographing a blue shirt to prove that is whiter than the white shirt, will simply pass him by in the race for the consumer's dollar. In other words, a sort of modem day Gresham's law-


William Moore Benidickson: Grosart's law.


Robert Jardine McCleave: As I was saying, it is a sort of modern day application of Gresham's law, that the bad will subvert and debase and eventually drive out the good.


Mr. Frank McGee (York-Scarborough):: Mr. Speaker, I am going to confine my remarks on this resolution introduced by the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. MacRae) to a few personal experiences I have had in recent times with television advertisements. The problem facing a parent of three young children, as I have, is serious indeed when it comes to television advertising. I have been asked by my children whether they should believe the advertisements which appear on the television programs they are watching. I started off by trying to explain that most of them were valid and honest advertisements, but some of them were not.
I was then asked, "Well, are they lies?" This is a matter in which young children have a way of embarrassing a parent, because these advertisements were not precisely lies but they were not precisely the truth; they were examples of misleading advertising such as we are discussing this afternoon. Unfortunately a young child cannot appreciate what is known in literature as the "willing suspension of disbelief" and take, as many of us do in our general attitude to advertisements on television-


Paul Joseph James Martin: That sounds like a Hegelian phrase.


Some hon. Members:: Order.
Request for Commercial Advertising Survey


Paul Joseph James Martin: I did not mean to interrupt the hon. member. I just said that my hon. friend's phrase suggests to my mind some of the philosophy of Hegel.


Frank Charles McGee: As I was saying before that rather obscure interjection-


Paul Joseph James Martin: For the benefit of the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Mac-donnell), who is a scholar, Hegel was a German philosopher.


Frank Charles McGee: Again, Mr. Speaker, if I may resume, this notion of the willing suspension of disbelief is very difficult to explain to a young child. Therefore my wife and I have instructed our children that they are to assume that the advertisements are not completely true and they are to proceed on that basis. It is clearly impossible for either parent to be called to the television screen to pass judgment on individual advertisements.
I think this is an unhappy commentary on current advertising practices on television, and I should like to acknowledge the point raised by the hon. member for York-Sunbury, that there have been honest, sincere and effective measures taken by advertisers and advertising agencies to restore the public confidence in their various advertising media.
I should like to give the house an example of the unhappy consequences of this type of advertising, particularly the type that appears on children's programs just before Christmas when we are watching for signs and listening for hints about what our children would like for Christmas. We were astonished, and somewhat delighted, to be told at the dinner table one night that our young son Owen, who is aged four, wanted a globe for Christmas. We tried to find out whether he really meant a globe. He described what he had in mind, and sure enough, that was it. We were rather flattered that our young son of four years of age should express an interest in international affairs. We thought, "Who knows; he might become as great an expert as the hon. member for Essex East in future years". Naturally we were somewhat flattered. We said, "Are you sure you do not want some of the other items that have frequently been mentioned recently?" No, that was the only thing he had in mind, and he stuck with it.
As Christmas got closer and closer we attempted to interest him in other things. We were unsuccessful, so on Christmas morning there was a globe for Owen under the Christmas tree. Owen was also in tears on Christmas morning because the notion to ask for this globe for Christmas had been placed in his mind by a television commercial on one of the children's programs, and as soon as we discovered what was the matter my wife
1366	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Request for Commercial Advertising Survey remembered having seen this commercial. It showed a globe all right, but at a certain moment a hole appeared in the globe, and it enlarged and one saw a herd of rhinoceroses. Then the hole closed again and opened up, and there were lions and tigers. Our youngster clearly had in his mind the idea that this globe would have a hole in it through which he could see the wonders of the world.


Paul Joseph James Martin: It sounds like the Prime Minister's vision.


William Moore Benidickson: Obviously talking this out.


Mr. Pigeon:: Mr. Speaker, order.


Frank Charles McGee: I offer that as an example that perhaps we should have been more alert and perhaps there are disillusionments in every child's mind on every Christmas morning, but it seemed to me that this was a typical example of the suggestions that are placed in children's minds particularly.
I must say one other word1 about children's programs. I resent the fact that advertisers are using children and instructing them precisely and specifically to go and get mummy or daddy to buy this or that product. One ol these days I am rather expecting them to be suggesting that the youngsters should slip a package of this or that into the carriage that mother pushes through a supermarket. Our family manages to get enough extraneous items in the carriage on a trip through the supermarket without that sort of instruction. That is the basic complaint I have with advertising, and particularly television advertising. I hope this resolution will find favour with the house and that the committee can proceed to examine this question and produce some useful results.
There is one other matter I wish to mention in connection with this resolution. I wish to place this information on the record in the hope that when Hansard leaves the printing presses and is distributed across the country to the various universities, some mathematicians either in our university communities or perhaps within the government service itself may help in solving a problem which is related to advertising. This is a problem which has baffled me as it has baffled a lot of people who have attempted to find some way in which a person borrowing money and embarking on credit arrangements can determine the annual rate of interest from the pattern of payments and make a fair evaluation as against other sources of credit available to him in our economy.
I should like to place on record in this regard a formula which, according to an article in the Financial Post of August 27, 1960, has been approved by the United States reserve board as a method of determining

annual interest rates. Perhaps I may now proceed to place the formula on the record. Afterwards I can carry on to outline the suggestion I have to make with regard to it. It is an equation involving five variables, and the component parts are as follows: i=rate of charge
m=number of payments in one year n=number of payments to discharge debt D=charge in dollars P=principal or cash advance
So the formula is:
._	2 m D
1- P (n+1)
This formula, admittedly complex, and clearly beyond the capacity of the average shopper to work out during an individual transaction, gives the precise interest rate to several decimal places. But the request I should like to put forward is this; I hope that some talented mathematician may resolve it for us. This formula gives the precise interest rate as an annual rate, but I would be satisfied with a much simpler formula which would arrive at the annual interest rate, give or take 1 or 2 per cent. Having found such a formula, a much simpler one than the one I have just put on record, the next step would be to have some ingenious person evolve a simple arithmetical calculator which would quickly produce the interest rate being charged. I have in mind a simple type of computer such as hon. members will have seen used for other purposes. An arrow is set at a certain figure; another arrow is set at another figure, and then the result is shown at another position in the device. I am hopeful that once the initial work and calculations had been carried out this device could be made out of heavy cardboard or plastic- something which would not involve much expense and something which could be made readily available to every person who has dealings in credit. Then we would have a situation where a person embarking on a small loan or embarking on a purchasing program on a credit basis would be able to tell what the annual interest rate involved in the transaction would be. He would then have a freedom of choice which, I suggest, should be an important ingredient in every shopper's activities, to decide whether it might be better to purchase the item he has in mind through the scheme before him or through some other form of credit, for example, a bank, a small loan company or some other source.
I hope, this problem having been placed on record in Hansard and going out, as it will, to the universities and many other circles in our country, that some bright

mathematician may be able to assist this parliament and this country in finding a solution to a problem which has escaped serious investigation for some time.


Mr. G. D. Clancy (Yorkton):: It is a pleasure to take the last three minutes of the time of the house in connection with this bill. I was very interested in the speech of the hon. member who introduced this measure. He certainly opened up a wide field. I was also interested in the remarks of the hon. member who spoke about breakfast foods for children. Whether they spill them on the floor or not is his problem.
I only wish to make one brief comment. I do think there is a great deal of misleading advertising taking place in connection with a certain phase of our national life, that is, in the drug business. That is the only aspect upon which I can speak from my own knowledge. When I look at 155 preparations containing five grammes of acetylsalicylic acid, and the different claims that are made for them, ranging from cures for ingrown toenails to falling hair and arthritis, I can only wonder. Of course, they do not say their
Request for Commercial Advertising Survey preparations can cure these troubles. They say "can relieve it" and they are quite right.
I think the Department of National Health and Welfare is doing a good job in protecting the public with regard to the purity of products offered for sale but it is not protecting the public against the effects of a certain kind of audial and visual advertising. Printed advertising, yes; you can read it and you can pinpoint it. "Are you suffering from laryngitis? Send a dollar to box 200". Then all you get is a bottle of 100 Aspirins. O.K., that is possible. Aspirins sell for 98 cents. I am sorry I used a trade name. I should have said acetylsalicylic acid.
I really think we should tighten up with regard to some of this advertising. I challenge the hon. member for Essex East, who used to be the minister of health, to say what he did to protect the public in this respect. He did nothing.
May I call it six o'clock?


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
1369
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, March I, 1962