1962-02-07

Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: I rise, Mr. Speaker, to correct a statement I made yesterday as reported at page 579 of Hansard with regard to the tabling of correspondence with the provinces. As found in the first column I stated as follows:
I have not had the consent of the premier of Quebec, although he did make reference to tabling in the reply he gave. I communicated with him by wire, and not having received an answer to the contrary I expect he would have no objection.
I find that the instructions I was given in that regard are not correct and that all the premiers received telegrams asking for consent except the premier of Quebec, who did not receive one because of the fact that he had stated on January 24 that he proposed to table the correspondence in the provincial house the next Tuesday, which was January 30.



QUESTIONS

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk)

Mr. Argue: 1.	When was the first section of the tri-service hospital in Ottawa ready for occupancy?
2.	Except for the installation of X-ray equipment, when was the hospital ready for use?
3.	On what date did, or will, this hospital come into use?
4.	What has been the average monthly cost of maintaining the hospital in each month since May 1961?
5.	Which company submitted the lowest tender for the installation of X-ray equipment in the hospital, and what was the bid?
6.	Was this bid accepted?
7.	If not, why not?
8.	What was the bid submitted by Pritchard X-ray Manufacturing, Ltd., of Richmond Hill, Ontario?
Answer by: Mr. Chambers:
1.	The initial takeover by the R.C.A.F. began on May 11, 1961 and the floors were taken over in sequence until the last floor was completed on August 31. Each floor was turned over to the R.C.A.F. upon completion
so that a start could be made on moving equipment and administrative personnel into the building. Before the hospital was ready for occupancy construction deficiencies also had to be corrected.
2.	November 27, 1961.
3.	November 28, 1961.
4.	Average monthly costs of maintaining the hospital in each month since May:
May '61			 Nil
June '61 			 Nil
July '61 			 Nil
Aug. '61				 $ 500
Sep. '61 			 $ 3,500
Oct. '61 			 $12,000
Nov. '61			 $37,000
Dec. '61 			 $52,000
5,	6, 7 and 8. Tenders have been submitted and are being considered. The contract has not as yet been awarded.


SIGNAL CABLE, MICROWAVE SYSTEM, ALBERTA-ALASKA
Mr. Bourgel: 1.	Was a purchase of signal cable made for use in building the micro-wave system from Grand Prairie, Alberta, to Alaska?
2.	If so, in what country was this signal cable purchased, and on what terms?
3.	Was any such signal cable classified as surplus cable, and had it been used previously?
4.	Were prices sought from Canadian cable manufacturers on new cable of identical cable construction for this particular project?
5.	If so, what prices were offered?
6.	If surplus cable was used on this particular project, what criteria determined the market price of surplus cable?
Answer by: Mr. Martini:
The management of the Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
1.	Yes.
2.	(a) Canada, United Kingdom, and the United States (b) see answer to No. 5.
3.	(a) Yes (b) no.
4.	Yes.
5.	It has not been the practice of the management to disclose prices, but cable purchased by Canadian National Telegraphs was on a competitive bid basis and orders awarded to the lowest tender. Cable purchased by the prime contractor was secured from Canadian and United States suppliers on a price and delivery basis.
6.	Some cable classified as surplus, with the same guarantee as newly manufactured

Questions
cable, was used by the prime contractor and its market price was determined on the basis of what was considered fair and reasonable.


* JACQUES CARTIER AND VICTORIA BRIDGES
Mr. Pigeon: What amount has been collected from tolls on the Jacques Cartier and Victoria bridges during each of the last ten years?


Mr. Martini:: As this answer gives statistical information only, Mr. Speaker, I would ask that it be printed in Hansard without being read.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The answer above referred to is as follows:]
Jacques Cartier Bridge
Tolls
Year	Collected
1952		  $1,580,577
1953		 1,711,415
1954		 1,787,766
1955		 2,074,710
1956		 2,127,832
1957		 2,201,338
1958		 2,078,767
1959		 2,321,913
1960		 3,298,362
1961		 3,435,657
Victoria Bridge
Tolls
Year	Collected
1952		 $ 499,000
1953		 594,200
1954		 608,600
1955		 667,900
1956		 765,600
1957		 915,900
1958		 867,300
1959		 965,300
1960		 904,800
1961		 1,109,200


MUNICIPAL SEWER SERVICE, MONCTON AIRPORT
Mr. Creaghan: 1.	Has a contract been executed between the Department of Transport and the town of Dieppe for the use of a municipal sewer to service the Moncton airport and departmental dwellings?
2.	If so, when, and at what annual cost to the department?
3.	If the answer to paragraph 1 is in the affirmative, does the contract or arrangement preclude and prohibit usage of the said sewer facilities by A. J. Melanson, a present user of the same?
Answer by: Mr. Martini:
1.	No.
2 and 3. Not applicable.


R.C.M.P. INVESTIGATION, CHINESE IMMIGRATION  PROTESTS
Mr. Argue: 1.	Has the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration received a petition from the Chinese national league, the Chinese Canadian citizens association of Manitoba, and the Winnipeg Chinese culture association protesting the continued R.C.M.P. investigation into Chinese immigration?
2.	If so, what was the nature of the reply, and on what date was it sent?
Answer by: Mrs. Fairclough:
1.	Yes, on November 1, 1961.
2.	The reply to the president of the Chinese nationalist league, who wrote on behalf of the organizations referred to, informed him that it was not the government's wish to prolong the special investigation into illegal Chinese immigration any longer than is absolutely necessary; but that the reluctance of numerous individuals to come forward on a voluntary basis resulted in a prolongation of the inquiry for a longer period than would otherwise have been necessary. The letter concluded by authorizing the organizations concerned to give full publicity to the contents of the letter throughout the Chinese community, in the hope that through their wholehearted co-operation, and that of the individuals directly concerned, the investigation might be brought to a conclusion at the earliest possible date.


* GANDER AIRPORT, NEWFOUNDLAND
Mr. Pigeon: 1.	When was the airport at Gander, Newfoundland, built, and at what cost?
2.	How many commercial aeroplanes have stopped at the said airport each year from 1957 to 1961?


Quinto Antonio Martini: 1.	The airport at Gander, Newfoundland, was built immediately preceding and during world war II. Capital investment is understood to have been about $20 million. The Department of Transport took over the airport April 1, 1949, and since that time has spent approximately $14 million for further expansion and development of the airport and related facilities.
2.1957 		
1958 		
1959 		
1960 		
1961


ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY-FOREIGN PILOT REPORT FORMS
Mr. Fisher: 1.	Was the Department of Transport aware that the Shipping Federation of Canada required foreign captains to fill in a pilot report form judging the capability, personal habits, and manners of the pilots assigned to their craft in the St. Lawrence seaway?

2.	If so, has the department received any representations from the Shipping Federation of Canada regarding the results of such a survey?
3.	If so, with what consequences?
4.	If not, did the department ask the Shipping Federation of Canada to prepare judgments of the pilots it employed?
Answer by: Mr. Martini:
1.	Yes.
2.	No.
3.	Not applicable.
4.	No.


PICKANDS MATHER FIRM SHIPBUILDING PLANS
Mr. Fisher: 1.	Has the Department of Transport received any indication that the American shipping firm of Pickands Mather plans to build or is building ships
in Canadian shipyards?
2.	Has this firm transferred, or given any indication to the department that it plans to transfer, its fleet to Canadian registry?
Answer by: Mr. Martini:
1.	No.
2.	No.


AIRPORT AND ACCESS ROAD CONSTRUCTION, QUEBEC
Mr. Martel: 1.	Has the federal government taken any part in the construction of an airport at La Sarre, West Abitibi, province of Quebec, and in the construction of an access road through forest to land north of the said town and of the parish of Vilbois, and of Authier Nord, under the federal-provincial scheme for forest protection and the agreements entered into for the said purpose by Ottawa and Quebec on September 12, 1960, and March 15, 1961?
2.	If so, what amounts have been paid by the federal government to the government of the province of Quebec for each of these projects: and, in the counties of Chapleau and Villeneuve, for all other works carried out under these agreements?
3.	Have these works been carried out by contract, as provided by section 5 of the agreement dated September 12, 1960, and section 7 of the agreement dated March 15, 1961, in the case of all projects in excess of $5,000; and, if so, (a) have public tenders been called, and on what date (b) have contracts been awarded to whom, and for what amounts (c) on what dates were each of these projects begun, and completed?
4.	If such works were not carried out by contract, on what basis were they executed, and what are the names of (a) the workers employed (b) the persons or companies from whom equipment was rented and (c) the persons by whom recommendations were made?
5.	Has a new agreement been executed since that date in each case and if so, for what period of time, and will a copy thereof be tabled in the house for the information of members?
Questions
Answer by: Mr. Flemming (Royal):
1.	Yes. Financial assistance has been provided for the projects described.
2.	La Sarre airstrip-$14,009.81 up to March 31, 1961.
Two roads in Abitibi-West,
Vilbois and Bourque-$105,720.99 up to January 31, 1962.
Rouyn-Noranda, La Pause road-$48,179.60 up to January 31, 1962,
Deschenes-Mazarin road-$394.16 up to January 31, 1962.
3.	No.
4.	Works were carried out by day labour. The information requested in (a), (b) and (c) is not in the possession of the federal government, but the province will be requested to provide it, if desired.
5.	No. However, an agreement extending the existing access road agreement from December 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962, has been forwarded to the province for signature and a new agreement re airstrips and access roads covering the period April 1, 1962 to March 31, 1964, is being prepared for signature. Copies of agreements will be tabled in house if or when executed.


WINTER WORKS PROGRAMS
Mr. Martel: 1.	What is the total number of projects approved so far under the federal-provincial municipal winter works program (a) for Canada (b) for the province of Quebec (c) for each other province?
2.	What has been, to date, the share of the federal government to approved projects throughout the country and more particularly in the province of Quebec?
3.	What is the total expenditure in connection with the approved projects in each province?
4.	What is the estimated total of man-hours of labour to be supplied, having regard to the approved projects?
5.	What is the total number of labourers who have been employed to date under this scheme?
6.	What is the estimated number of labourers who will be employed during the winter season in connection with all the approved projects?
7.	Will the Minister of Labour table in the house a copy of the correspondence exchanged with the government of the province of Quebec concerning the present winter works program?
8.	Will the Minister of Labour inform the house as to whether or not any regular inspections of such works are carried out, and by whom?
Answer by: Mr. Thrasher:

1, 2 and 3.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR-CANADA Municipal Winter Works Incentive Program 1961-62
Cumulative Report Week Ending February 2, 1962
Canada	B.C.	Alta.	Sask.	Man.	Ont.	Que.	N.B.	N.S.	PiE.I.	Nfld.	Yukon	N.W.T.	Indian BandsApplications Received	6,165	577	687	946	182	1,225	1,844	193	59	34	350	4	14	50Applications Accepted	6,092	574	686	935	180	1,215	1,799	193	59	34	350	4	13	50Applications Rejected, Pending or Withdrawn	73	3	1	11	2	10	45	0	0	0	0	0	1	0Estimated Total Cost of Projects	258,217	27,683	26,783	15,106	6,787	75,262	96,995	3,343	1,487	804	3,620	12	36	299Estimated Total Direct Payroll Cost of Projects	81,561	9,953	7,661	4,388	2,192	22,167	31,447	1,334	610	353	1,242	5	31	178Estimated Cost of Projects During Period of Program	201,758	22,756	21,443	12,174	5,849	53,993	78,930	2,904	845	579	1,960	12	36	277Estimated Direct Payroll Cost of Projects During Period of Program	66,731	8,597	6,820	3,675	1,821	16,000	27,127	1,126	338	203	815	5	31	173Estimated Federal Government Share of Direct Payroll Costs	33,100	4,288	3,374	1,823	910	7,953	13,410	563	169	101	407	2	15	86Estimated Number of Men to be Hired During Period of Program	111,687	6,547	10,554	13,153	2,744	17,965	47,365	3,336	808	538	7,663	15	137	862Estimated Man Days Work to be Provided During Period of Program	4,758,368	440,511	463,732	309,966	136,907	1.020,514	2,119,688	108,402	30,949	24,650	81,898	220	2,160	18,771Number of Municipalities Participating in Program*	2,324	117	197	412	48	302	807	73	23	20	273	3	10	39
* Also includes Indian Bands, Unorganized Settlements and various Boards and Commissions.
N.B.-Cost figures shown in thousands of dollars.
Percentage of total payroll cost to total cost of projects undertaken during period of program, 33.1%.
626	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Questions

4.	The estimated number of man days work to be provided is set out in the attached statement. The number of man hours work to be provided would be approximately 8 times that figure, or 38,066,944.
5.	This information is not available since there is a delay of several weeks in the submission of claims for work performed.
6.	See statement attached.
7.	Yes. The correspondence will be tabled when the consent of the province has been obtained, if the hon. member will give a notice of motion for papers.
8.	The detailed administration of the program rests with the provincial authorities.


* PACIFIC COAST TIDE AND CURRENT TABLES
Mr. Broome: 1.	With reference to Pacific coast tide and current tables catalogue No. M53-62/10, and tide tables for the strait of Georgia to Queen Charlotte strait, catalogue No. M52-62/15, issued by the Canadian hydrographic service, Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, when was the information contained in these booklets sent to the Queen's printer for publication of the 1962 edition?
2.	Since both these publications are important to coastal shipping, can arrangements be made this year to have this information available in time to allow distribution of the booklets to take place in early November 1962 covering 1963 tables?


Mr. Flynn:: The answers are as follows:
1.	M53-62/10 was sent to the Queen's printer on February 10, 1961. M53-62/15 was sent to the Queen's printer on November 24, 1961.
2.	We confidently expect the tables will be distributed by November, 1962.


POSTAL SERVICE TENDERS, BEAUCE ELECTORAL DISTRICT
Mr. Racine: 1.	From September 30, 1961, to March 31, 1962, has the Post Office Department invited tenders in the electoral district of Beauce for the (a) rural mail service (b) side service (c) stage service (d) city service (e) highway service covering part of the electoral district of Beauce?
2.	If so, which particular service, and which area was involved?
Answer by: Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de
Grace):
1.	(a) Yes. (b), (c), (d) and (e) No.
2.	Rural mail service; St. Prosper de Dorchester, R.R. No 1; St. Honore, R.R. No. 1; St. Honore, R.R. No. 2; St. Ephrem de Beauce, R.R. No. 3.


POSTAL CONTRACTS RENEWED, BEAUCE ELECTORAL DISTRICT
Mr. Racine: From September 30, 1961, to March 31, 1962, how many contracts have been renewed by the Post Office Department in the electoral district of Beauce
Questions
for (a) rural mail service (b) side service (c) stage service (d) city service (e) highway service covering part of the electoral district of Beauce?
Answer by: Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de
Grace):
(a)	10.
(b)	1.
(c)	2.
(d)	nil.
(e)	nil.


* STATISTICAL STUDY, AUTOMOTIVE AFTERMARKET
Mr. Nixon: 1.	Has the government received a request from the Canadian automotive wholesalers and manufacturers association that the government undertake an immediate statistical study of the automotive aftermarket?
2.	If so, what decision, if any, has been reached on this request?
3.	Is the government presently considering the effects on the automotive aftermarket of the duty free entry and the extended content concept put forward by the Bladen commission?


Mr. Fleming (Eglinion):: 1.	Yes.
2.	All available statistical material, including that submitted by interested parties, is now being studied.
3.	The government is considering the possible effects of the various recommendations of the Bladen commission in the light of the representations which were invited from all the Canadian groups concerned at the time the report was tabled.


REMEMBRANCE DAY
Mr. Argue: 1.	Did the cabinet send a directive to the civil service commission on or before October 18, 1961, stating that employees, including prevailing rate employees, whose normal day of rest fell on Remembrance day, November 11, 1961, would be permitted to observe the holiday on the next following working day or on a day selected by the deputy head of their department?
2.	If so, (a) did the cabinet later reconsider this matter (b) what subsequent instructions were sent to the civil service commission, and on what date?
Answer by: Mr. Diefenbaker:
1.	The civil service commission was told early in September, 1961, that employees whose normal day of rest fell on Remembrance day, November 11, 1961, which was a Saturday, should be permitted to observe the holiday on the next following working day, or another day selected by the deputy head of their department in the light of the exigencies of their service. This communication made no exception for prevailing rate employees not covered by the Civil Service Act in respect of holidays. Some of these employees including those at the printing bureau, were not entitled to a holiday on

Questions
November 11 because they had chosen other holidays instead as provided in the applicable regulations under the Financial Administration Act.
2. No subsequent message was sent to the commission but on November 9 the printing bureau was informed, in accordance with a decision of the government, that its prevailing rate employees could not be given an additional holiday because of the misinterpretation made by the bureau of the directive relating to the observance of the holiday on November 11. The bureau was further told that if it considered that a holiday must be granted on November 13, as this had already been announced, this additional holiday must be taken in lieu of another of the holidays which its prevailing rate employees were permitted to choose during the ensuing twelve months.


* RECRUITING PAMPHLET, SURVIVAL TRAINING PROGRAM
Mr. Pitman: 1.	On what date was the recruiting pamphlet on the special militia training program in survival tactics published?
2.	How many such pamphlets were published in the English language, and at what total cost?
3.	On what date were instructions issued to destroy all stocks of this pamphlet?
4.	What was the name of the advertising agency commissioned to prepare this pamphlet, and what was the charge for this service to the Department of National Defence?
5.	Has any new revised pamphlet been prepared?
6.	If so, what advertising agency has been employed for such service, and at what cost?
7.	How many of these revised pamphlets have been, or will be, produced, and at what total cost?


Mr. Chambers:: The answers are as follows:
1.	November 2, 1961.
2.	234,000 copies of this pamphlet were printed at a total cost of $5,804.
3.	December 18, 1961.
4.	O'Brien Advertising Limited, 1030 West Georgia street, Vancouver, British Columbia. Agency charges to the department amounted to $594.
5.	Yes.
6.	O'Brien Advertising Limited. There were no charges to the department.
7.	166,350 revised pamphlets were printed on December 22, at a cost of $2,730. These pamphlets should be sufficient to meet the needs of the remaining courses. *


* ASSISTANCE TO UNIVERSITIES AND URBAN RENEWAL
Mr. Pitman: 1.	How many universities have taken advantage of the extension of N.H.A. assistance to universities under last session's Bill C-42 to amend the National Housing Act?

2.	What are the names of these universities, and what was the amount of N.H.A. loan in each case?
3.	How much has the federal government paid out in the cause of urban renewal during 1961 under Bill C-42?
4.	How many municipalities have taken advantage of this legislation in 1961, what are the names of these municipalities, and what was the amount granted to each?


Mr. Walker:: Because of the length of the answer, may I respectfully ask that it be accepted as read and printed in Hansard?


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The answer above referred to is as follows:]
1.	22 universities and colleges.
2.
Institution	Amount
Acadia University, Wolfville, N.S. .$	503,370
Assumption University, Windsor,
Ont	 1,378,564
Brandon College, Brandon, Man. .	905,972
University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, B.C	 1,331,946
Carleton University, Ottawa, Ont. .	1,512,000
Emmanuel College, Saskatoon,
Sask	 394,176
University of King's College,
Halifax, N.S	 689,670
Laval University, Quebec, P.Q. .	3,255,000
College de Matane, Matane, P.Q. .	630,900
Mount St. Bernard College, Antigonish, N.S	 560,862
University of New Brunswick,
Fredericton, N.B	 1,800,000
Seminaire de Nicolet, Nicolet, P.Q. 483,300 Notre Dame College, Wilcox, Sask. 213,975 Academie de Quebec, Quebec, P.Q. 810,000 Renison College, Waterloo, Ont. .	248,111
St. Francis Xavier University,
Antigonish, N.S	 1,315,863
University of St. Jerome's College, Waterloo, Ont	 300,000
Seminaire St. Pie X, Hauterive,
P-Q	 221,706
University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, P.Q	 1,750,000
United College, Winnipeg, Man. .	692,658
College de Victoriaville, Victoriaville, P.Q	 810,565
Waterloo Lutheran University,
Waterloo, Ont	 275,790

Note: In addition to the above approved loans, applications are under consideration from 16 other institutions for a further $21,480,000.
3.	Bill C-42 authorized an increase from $25 million to $50 million in the aggregate

amount of federal assistance to municipalities for projects of urban redevelopment under section 23 of the National Housing Act. Payments totalling $2,777,000 were made to municipalities under this section of the act during 1961. At the year end the federal government had approved contributions to municipalities of approximately $24 million for projects of urban redevelopment.
4.	In 1961 the federal government approved a contribution of $3.7 million to assist the city of Winnipeg in a redevelopment project. In addition a grant of $375,000 was approved to assist the city of Halifax in an extension of the Jacob street redevelopment area.
At the end of the year applications at various stages of development were under consideration for urban redevelopment projects in the following municipalities: Trail, B.C.; Hamilton, Kingston and Toronto, Ontario; Montreal and Sherbrooke, Quebec.
In 1961 federal contributions totalling $82,000 under part V of the National Housing Act were approved to assist the following municipalities with urban redevelopment and housing studies: Calgary, Alberta; metropolitan Winnipeg, Manitoba; Niagara Falls, Ontario; Hull, Quebec.


*STEERING COMMITTEE, ECONOMIC PROBLEMS
Mr. Dumas: Was a steering committee set up at a meeting held with the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Minister of Labour on March 15, 1961, with representatives of industry and labour for the purpose of recommending a permanent structure for business, labour, and government co-operation in solving economic problems; and. if so, who were the members of this steering committee, how many meetings, if any, has it held, and on what dates?


Mr. Morris:: Representatives of industry and labour met with the ministers of trade and commerce and labour on March 15, 1961, to discuss the need for co-operation between labour and management and with particular reference to the then forthcoming first meeting of the national productivity council to be held on March 21, 1961. At the meeting of industry and labour representatives, a steering committee was established whose membership was as follows:
Joint Chairmen: Mr. T. R. McLagan, president of the Canadian Manufacturers' Association.
Mr. Claude Jodoin, president, the Canadian Labour Congress.
Mr. G. E. Grundy, president, Canadian Automobile Chamber of Commerce.
Dr. E. B. Gillanders, president, Canadian Metal Mining Association.
Mr. Arthur G. Sullivan, president, Canadian Construction Association.
Orders for Returns
Mr. Russell Bell, assistant research director, Canadian Labour Congress.
Mr. Jean-Paul Geoffroy, director, technical services, Confederation of National Trade Unions.
Mr. A. R. Gibbons, vice president, Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen.
Mr. James A. Roberts, deputy minister, Department of Trade and Commerce.
Mr. George V. Haythorne, deputy minister, Department of Labour.
The steering committee held one meeting on March 15, 1961. In a subsequent meeting between the two co-chairmen of the original meeting and senior officials of the departments of trade and commerce and labour it was agreed that no further basis existed for a continuation of the steering committee in view of the formal establishment of the national productivity council.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Mcllraiih: 1.	Has the government been in touch with the United Kingdom government with respect to making available to the Canadian House of Commons a copy of the full summary of the speech made by Edward Heath, Britain's Lord Privy Seal, in Paris on October 10, 1961?
2.	If so, what reply has been received from the British government?


Donald Methuen Fleming: I now table the outline of Mr. Heath's Paris speech of October 10 and the summary of that portion of it relating to the commonwealth which was provided at the time to the Canadian government, supplemented by an oral briefing by the Lord Privy Seal. I also table the full text of Mr. Heath's speech as requested by the hon. member for Ottawa West on January 19.


Mr. Speaker:: I understand that the minister is tabling documents asked for previously. Has he leave of the house to table these documents?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: Do I take it that the tabling of these documents also answers the question?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The answer to the question is obvious now that the documents have been tabled.


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps it might be an order for return tabled herewith to avoid printing all these documents in Hansard.

Orders for Returns


* PROTESTS TO C.B.C. FROM &quot;LA SOCIETE DES AMIS DE MAURICE L. DUPLESSIS&quot;
Mr. Fisher: 1.	Has the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation received a protest from "La Society des Amis de Maurice L. Duplessis"?
2.	If so, when, and about what?
3.	To whom was the protest sent?
4.	Has the government itself, distinct from the C.B.C., received any such protest?
5.	Has either the government or the C.B.C. received any representations about the matter in protest from any federal ministers of the crown, acting as members or agents of "La Soci6t6 des Amis de Maurice L. Duplessis"?


* REVENUE POST OFFICES, HUDSON'S BAY COMPANY
Mr. Howard: 1.	Are any revenue post offices in Canada contained in the premises of the Hudson's Bay Company and, if so, what are the names of any such post offices?
2.	In each of the said post offices, what is (a) the name and address of the postmaster, and the date of his original and any subsequent appointments (b) the amount of his monthly payment, and the place to which this monthly payment is addressed?


Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: Mr. Speaker, since this answer is primarily a lengthy list of place names, some of which are in Eskimo or Indian which I do not speak or pronounce very well, I should like to make this question an order for return.


Mr. Speaker:: Order for return, tabled herewith.


CIVIL DEFENCE EXPENDITURES
Mr. Martin (Essex East): 1.	What were the total amounts spent in all departments of government during the 1960-61 fiscal year and the 1961-62 fiscal year to date on civil defence, survival, emergency measures and related programs?
2.	What is the total amount of the estimated expenditures in all departments of government for the 1962-63 fiscal year for civil defence, survival, emergency measures and related programs?


COLD LAKE AIRPORT, ALTA.  CITY CONSTRUCTION CO.
Mr. Argue: 1.	Was or is City Construction Company, Limited, of Vancouver, under contract with the Department of Transport for the development of Cold Lake airport, Alberta?
2.	If so, (a) when did contract tenders close (b) when was the contract awarded to City Construction Company, Limited (c) was any investigation made of this company's financial position before the contract was awarded (d) were progress payments made to the company and were they made on the strength of statutory declarations and, if so, (i) what were the amounts of the progress payments and on what dates were they made (ii) is the government still in possession of the statutory declarations?
3.	Were progress payments to the company eventually stopped and, if so, why, and on what date?

4.	Did the Department of Transport, or any of its officials in Edmonton, receive complaints concerning non-payment or slow payment by the company to subcontractors and, if so, (a) on what date was the first complaint or intimation that something was wrong received (b) what action was then taken, and on what date or dates?
5.	Did the company make a proposal, or several proposals, under the Bankruptcy Act and, if so, (a) to what effect and on what date or dates (b) when was the trustee appointed under the Bankruptcy Act, what is his name, and what position, if any, does he hold with the Mercantile Bank (c) has the trustee submitted to the creditors a statement of the source and application of all funds received for the Cold Lake project and, if so, what was the source and application of these funds?
6.	Was the company indebted to the Mercantile Bank on December 31, 1958, and on December 31, 1959, and, if so, what was the amount on both dates?


TECHNICAL AND VOCATIONAL TRAINING COURSES FOR UNEMPLOYED
Mr. Pitman: 1.	How many communities were carrying on courses for unemployed persons under schedule M to the agreements under the Technical and Vocational Training Assistance Act as of December 1. 1961?
2.	What were the names of these communities, and how many persons were being trained in each case?
3.	What courses of instruction were being offered in each of these communities, and how many persons were being trained in each of these courses?
4.	What was the total cost of the program in the year 1961?


VOCATIONAL TRAINING ENROLMENT, ONTARIO
Mr. Pitman: 1.	What was the total enrolment in vocational training at the secondary school level in Ontario as of December 31, 1960?
2.	What was the total capacity of institutions offering vocational training at the secondary school level in Ontario as of December 31, 1960?
3.	What was the total number of new vocational or vocational wings to existing institutions, at the secondary school level, approved by the federal government for 75 per cent grant as of December 31, 1961?
4.	What will be the maximum enrolment possible for these vocational schools already approved?
5.	How many students graduated in woodworking in the vocational secondary schools in Ontario in the year 1961?
6.	How many woodworking shops in Ontario vocational secondary schools, or new wings of such institutions, have been approved by the federal government in 1961?


* HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION, PRINCE RUPERT-JASPER
Mr. Howard: 1. Since July 1, 1961, has the Premier of British Columbia or any member of the British Columbia government approached the federal government asking that an agreement be entered into between the two said governments for the building of a highway between Prince Rupert, B.C., and Jasper, Alberta, under a plan of financial participation similar to that existing pursuant to the

Trans-Canada Highway Act; and, if so, upon what date was the said approach made, and by whom?
2.	Were any proposals made by the said British Columbia representatives for a plan of financial participation and, if so, what are the details thereof?
3.	What reply, if any, was given by the federal government?


David James Walker: May I ask that this be made an order for return? The consent of the government of British Columbia should be obtained before making the information public.


Mr. Speaker:: Order for return.


BOOKS BANNED ENTRY INTO CANADA
Mr. Herridge: 1.	What are the titles of each book banned or prohibited entry into Canada by the Department of National Revenue in each year since 1952 when the last such return was made?
2.	Which of said books was prohibited because of (a) its treasonable or seditious nature (b) its immoral or indecent character?
3.	What officials made the examination of each of the said books, and who made the final decision to ban or prohibit in each case?
4.	Are such officials given special training to qualify them to decide what is proper, from a literary, moral or political standpoint, for Canadians to read; and, if so, what is the nature of such training?
5.	What titles are presently on the prohibited or banned list?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 5-Mr. Pickersgill (for Mr. Mc-Ilrailh):
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all contracts entered into between the Canadian wheat board and the China Resources Company for the sale of grain under the long term agreement between the Canadian wheat board and the China Resources Company.
Mr. Jorgenson:: In the absence of the minister may I ask that this motion stand?


Mr. Pickersgill:: That would be quite agreeable, sir.
Motion stands.



AIR BASE, BATHURST AREA, N.B.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 7
Mr. Robichaud:: That an order of the house do issue for a copy of the report dealing with a survey carried out by officials of the Department of Transport regarding the possibility of establishing an air base or landing strip in the Bathurst area, Gloucester county, New Brunswick.


Mr. Balcer:: This notice of motion calls for the production of a survey report by officials of the department in connection with the possibility of establishing an airport in the Bathurst area of Gloucester county, New Brunswick.
Motions for Papers
In this instance we have made available certain basic material, obtained as a result of the survey, to the Gloucester municipal airport committee to assist the committee in its efforts to develop an airport. However, as the hon. member knows, departmental documents have always been considered as privileged, and while in order to be of as much help as possible the department supplied information from the report to the municipality, it would not be in accordance with established practice to table the report. In the circumstances I would hope the member would be agreeable to withdrawing his motion.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: I agree.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



AIR BASE, DALHOUSIE-CHARLO AREA, N.B.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 8-Mr. Robichaud:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of the report dealing with a survey carried out by officials of the Department of Transport regarding the possibility of establishing an air base or landing strip in the Dalhousie-Charlo area, Resti-gouche county, New Brunswick.
Léon Balcer: The same principle applies to this motion, and I wonder if my hon. friend would agree to withdrawing it.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: For the reasons given by the minister I would agree.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



NATIONAL POWER GRID SYSTEM

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 9-Mr. Argue:
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 and each of the provinces since January 1, 1961, regarding the establishment of a national power grid system.
John George Diefenbaker: Subject to the consent of the provincial premiers.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservation expressed by the Prime Minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 10-Mr. Howard:
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 or any agency, department, or branch thereof, and any other government since April 1, 1960, relating to the breadth of the territorial sea and proposals for the widening thereof.
Mr. Green:: There is very good reason why we cannot comply with this request. It is important that nothing be said or done which might prejudice the significance of the 1960

Inquiries of the Ministry vote at Geneva on the joint Canada-United States "six plus six" formula. Reference to any action undertaken or still in progress could do just that. Consideration of this matter has been and is being actively pursued by Canada and other like minded countries.


Mr. Speaker:: Does the hon. member wish to proceed, having regard to what the minister has said?


Mr. Howard:: I think this could well be transferred for debate under the newly established rules.


Mr. Speaker:: Transferred, pursuant to
standing order 47.



SECOND TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY SYSTEM

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 11-Mr. Argue:
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 federal government and any provincial government since January 1, 1961, regarding federal aid for the construction of a second trans-Canada highway system.
David James Walker: Again subject to the usual reservation respecting confidential and privileged documents, and also subject to the consent of the provincial governments concerned.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitations
expressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 12-Mr. Pickersgill:
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 exchanged between any member of the government of Canada on the one hand, and the mayor of Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, on the other, since January 1, 1961, regarding the replacement of the lighthouse at Yarmouth, Nova Scotia.
Mr. Dorion:: Mr. Speaker, this motion is acceptable.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of ihe Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Prime Minister based on a press report that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom has stated that he would consider calling a prime ministers'
[Mr. Green.J
conference on the common market if there were a general demand for such a conference.
My question is, have there been any recent exchanges between the right hon. gentleman and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom on this matter, and if so can he report anything to the house concerning those exchanges?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, as the Leader of the Opposition knows, Canada has suggested on a number of occasions that before a final decision is made regarding the United Kingdom's application to join the common market, there should be a conference of the prime ministers of the commonwealth, as the issues involve matters of interest and concern to various members of this family.
I do not think there is anything further I can say at this time. There has been no communication recently in this connection, it being understood that as the negotiations are continued between the Six and the United Kingdom we will be kept advised as to the course being followed. When it is appropriate for us to make a formal request, that will be done. However, even without a formal request our attitude is known.



COLUMBIA RIVER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Does the statement reported in today's Gazette to the effect that "the United States cannot wait more than three or four months for Canada to ratify a proposed Columbia river treaty", made by Mr. Teno Roncalio, chairman of the United States section of the international joint commission, have any bearing on the government's policy with respect to the sale of power in the United States derived from downstream benefits from any Columbia river development, or on the discussions that the Minister of Finance expects to have with Premier Bennett of British Columbia?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, there are different versions of what the chairman of the United States section of the international joint commission said in his speech at some luncheon meeting. However, I would point out to the hon. member that Mr. Roncalio is not the spokesman for the United States government on this question at all. The international joint commission was involved at an earlier

date when they agreed on principles which were to underlie a treaty, but these men are not the responsible authorities at this stage.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: The minister apparently
overlooked answering the latter part of my question, which was "or on the discussions that the Minister of Finance expects to have with Premier Bennett of British Columbia".


Howard Charles Green: I merely wish to point out that I am not concerned with what this particular gentleman says.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. E. Pascoe (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, we all regret that the Minister of Agriculture is still confined to his home as a result of his strenuous efforts on behalf of agriculture.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


James Ernest Pascoe: In his absence I should like to address a question to his parliamentary secretary. Mr. Clive Davidson of the Canadian wheat board has been granted leave of absence to go to Iraq and assist that country in establishing a wheat marketing and storage program. Can the parliamentary secretary inform the house whether this indicates a possible increased market for Canadian wheat?


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: Mr. Speaker, in reply to the hon. member I would say that Mr. Davidson is participating in a study of the food and agricultural organization of the United Nations and is part of the contribution of technical personnel made by this country to this and similar United Nations projects. This study is, I understand, to assist Iraq in establishing a wheat program, and is not tied in with promotional activities of the Canadian wheat board.



CIVIL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. R. Garland (Nipissing):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. I was able to send him notice earlier.
Has the minister now received the representations made to his department by the township of Widdifield, stating the municipality's concern that the construction of the Bomarc base and SAGE by the Department of National Defence will make the Widdifield
Inquiries of the Ministry area one of the main targets in the event of war, and requesting the Department of National Defence to construct, or pay for construction of, public fall-out shelters in the area? Would the minister comment?


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, representations were received from the clerk treasurer of the township of Widdifield. In commenting on these representations I might point out that there are several communities across the country which are located in the vicinity of national defence establishments. Under the distribution of duties with regard to civil defence generally, the Department of National Defence is not responsible for planning or construction related to fall-out shelters. Responsibility for planning in this regard was given to the emergency measures organization. The house will recall that on September 23, 1961 as reported at pages 8804-05 of Hansard for that day, the Prime Minister gave a list of those locations which could be considered as the most likely target areas. The township of Widdifield was not included in that list.
Information has already been given to the house with regard to the survey which was conducted by the Department of Public Works of federal buildings across the country to determine the fall-out protection that could be provided by such buildings. Federal buildings in the North Bay area were included in this survey.


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Trinity):: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Would the minister say that the reason the township of Widdifield was not included in the list of target areas was that the Bomarcs were not armed with warheads?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Trinity is pursuing his old practice of asking inappropriate questions.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In view of the statement by Dr. J. E. Monagle, chief of the nutrition division of the Department of National Health and Welfare, as reported by the Canadian Press, to the effect that millions of dollars are being wasted annually by those who respond to the "sucker bait" of the vitamin manufacturers, and in view of the serious implications of this charge, would the minister state what evidence there is to

Inquiries of the Ministry support it and whether Dr. Monagle was speaking for himself or as a result of research carried out within the department?


Hon. J. W. Monteiih (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to express appreciation to the hon. member for giving me notice of his intention to ask this question. Dr. Monagle's statement stressed- in rather forceful terms, I must admit-a point to which my department subscribes; namely, that there is an unduly widespread use of vitamin and mineral supplements as far as the average individual is concerned. We have always underlined the desirability of following Canada's food rules as prepared by the Canadian nutrition council, which themselves provide a balanced diet for normal needs. Where special supplements are necessary, in my department's view the advice of a doctor is the best means of ensuring that the individual gains some real benefit.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, as a supplementary
question, may I ask the minister whether this advice is part of the government's program for encouraging small business?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Small talk from Bonavista-Twillingate.



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Theodore Hellyer: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Can the minister say when he will be tabling the estimates for 1962-63?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Soon, Mr. Speaker.



SALES TAX


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Finance, notice of which was inadvertently sent to the Minister of National Revenue. In view of the special report submitted to the finance minister in 1956 by the Ontario bar association protesting arbitrary changes in the 11 per cent federal sales tax-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Perhaps the hon. member for Kootenay West would permit me to interrupt him. He was land enough to send me notice of his intention to ask this question, too. I have looked at the question with some care and have come to the conclusion that it is an endeavour to ask for budget secrets on the orders of the day.


Some hon. Members:: Shame.


Mr. Speaker:: In any event, I think there may be more appropriate occasions for the hon. member to put his question.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should like to put a question to the Minister of Finance, if 1 may. I should like to ask the Minister of Finance whether he has any budget secrets.


Donald Methuen Fleming: There is one, Mr. Speaker, that I shall be very glad to share with the hon. member and others. Yesterday the Ottawa Citizen, on its first page, contained the following statement:
Finance department officials, usually meeting daily on the budget at this time of year, are not doing it this year.
This statement is simply untrue, Mr. Speaker. It is made out of whole cloth. Yesterday I said that everybody around here seemed to be behaving normally or conducting himself normally except the official opposition.


John Whitney Pickersgill: And the press.


Donald Methuen Fleming: 1 can say that the Department of Finance and the Minister of Finance are going about their business in a way that is perfectly normal at this time of the year with respect to all their duties, including the budget and everything else.


Hazen Robert Argue: I have a supplementary question. From the minister's statement, may 1 take it that this is a commitment that there will be a budget?


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am quite certain there will be a budget this year.


Hazen Robert Argue: This session?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I should like to ask the Minister of Finance another question. Having knowledge of the question I intended to ask, could he say that he will give consideration to it, without any breach of public confidence?


Donald Methuen Fleming: This is not a new
matter by any means, Mr. Speaker. I may say that it has been raised frequently, although we cannot find in the departmental files any trace of the report to which the hon. member referred and which was supposed to have been sent to my predecessor in 1956. However, this is a subject that has been frequently raised and it has received study and attention. I am quite sure that it will continue to receive study and attention.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Instead of action.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence and ask him whether he has reached any decision relative to conventional or nuclear warheads being supplied to the Bomarc base now under the jurisdiction of the Royal Canadian Air Force. If not, what is the purpose of the installation?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I believe the hon. member is repeating a question which was asked earlier in the session and which I then suggested, as it involved a basic matter of policy, was not the type of question which hon. members could expect to have answered on the orders of the day.


Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, the previous question was asked before the jurisdiction of the base was transferred to the R.C.A.F. command.


Mr. Speaker:: There seems to me to be the same question of policy involved. If the minister wishes to deal with it on the orders of the day it is up to him, but in my view it is a policy question which is not properly asked at this time.



HONEST JOHN MISSILE-INQUIRY AS TO WARHEAD

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence and ask whether Canadian troops overseas are now equipped with the Honest John weapon, and if so, what type of warhead has been or is to be supplied. Is it conventional, nuclear or sand?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, as I think the hon. member is well aware, the S.S.M. or Honest John battery which was in training here in Canada last fall has now been dispatched to the brigade overseas and is there training with that brigade.
In response to the latter part of the question, no warhead of any kind, let alone one with sand, has been supplied to this brigade. The battery there has Honest John missiles. Some of these missiles have training heads which contain a small explosive charge which makes it possible to determine where the thing has burst on a practice firing.


Paul Theodore Hellyer: You could use them for flares if you needed help.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Harold Edward Winch: In view of the minister's reply are we to understand that the taxpayers' money has been expended to purchase equipment that will not be armed with warheads?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I think the hon. member is now expressing a viewpoint rather than asking for information.



BOBCAT VEHICLE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hubert Badanai (Fort William):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. Can the minister inform the house whether the larger order for the vehicle known as the Bobcat is still under active consideration by the government?


Douglas Scott Harkness: The situation with regard to the Bobcat was outlined in detail when the estimates of the department were before the house a few months ago. The situation as outlined at that time prevails. A production test order is being produced at the present time. When it has been completed successfully we shall proceed with the order for some 480 vehicles in order to complete this particular project.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Labour whether he or his department is aware that the municipal authorities of St. Boniface, Manitoba, are reported to be ordering unemployed workers to enrol at a national survival training course in an effort to combat unemployment, and whether the government is co-operating in this activity.


Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, I am unaware of this report as to what is happening in the national employment office in St. Boniface. However, I shall certainly check into it, because it is not the intention of the national employment service, as a means of combating unemployment, to direct anyone into the course being held by the Department of National Defence.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I could put a supplementary question to the minister, more for his information than as a question. I did not say it was the national employment office, and I do not think it is. I believe the municipal officials are engaging in this activity. That is why I asked the minister whether

Inquiries of the Ministry the government was aware of it. I am very-grateful to the minister for agreeing to look into the matter.


Michael Starr: We are not aware of it, Mr. Speaker, but what I said with respect to our policy certainly does not agree with what the hon. member suggests is taking place.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Richard Garland: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. Will the minister explain why invitations to tender on two urban military housing projects proposed for the North Bay area were not extended to the public generally in the customary way, but rather to a select group only?


David James Walker: Mr. Speaker, would my hon. friend be good enough to put that question on the order paper?


John Richard Garland: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The question I have just put to the minister is, I suggest, a matter of some urgency because contracts for the projects are currently being negotiated.


Mr. Fulton:: The hon. member has not even identified the projects.


John Richard Garland: I should like to pursue this matter and ask the minister to comment on it, if he would.


Mr. Speaker:: I take it that the hon. gentleman did not give the minister notice of his question. The minister has already indicated he is not prepared to answer today. I cannot go beyond that.


John Richard Garland: In that event, Mr. Speaker, would the minister accept my question as notice today?


David James Walker: No, Mr. Speaker. If the hon. gentleman, like other hon. members, would be good enough occasionally-perhaps once out of a hundred times-to give notice of his intention to ask questions, the business of the house would be expedited considerably.


John Richard Garland: That is what I am attempting to do now. I am giving the minister notice.



OLD AGE SECURITY ACT


Jay Waldo Monteith: the third reading of Bill No. C-54, to amend the Old Age Security Act.

Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.



OLD AGE ASSISTANCE ACT


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Monday, February 5, consideration in committee of the following resolution-Mr. Monteith (Perth)- Mr. Martineau in the chair:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Old Age Assistance Act to increase to sixty- five dollars per month the maximum amount of assistance in respect of which payments may be made to the provinces under the provisions of that act, and to increase the total amount of allowable income, Inclusive of assistance, by one hundred and eighty dollars a year in the case of an unmarried person and three hundred and sixty dollars a year in the case of a married person.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. Monteith (Perth) thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-55, to amend the Old Age Assistance Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Jay Waldo Monteith: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Blind Persons Act to increase to sixty five dollars per month the maximum amount of allowance in respect of which payments may be made to the provinces under the provisions of that act, and to increase the total amount of allowable income, inclusive of allowance, by one hundred and eighty dollars a year in the case of an unmarried person and three hundred and sixty dollars a year in the case of a married person.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Martineau in the chair.


Jay Waldo Monteith: The considerations which have led to changes in old age security and old age assistance benefits, Mr. Chairman, have also prompted comparable amendments to the Blind Persons Act.
Briefly, two alterations are being proposed. First, the maximum benefit is to be raised by $10 to $65 a month. Second, the income ceilings are to be increased by $180 a year in the case of an unmarried person and by $360 a year in the case of a married person. Again, as with old age assistance, the income ceilings now proposed for recipients of blindness allowances have been increased by amounts in excess of the increase in the maximum benefit. This means, of course, that

a recipient can have higher earnings than at present without reduction in pension.
Like old age assistance, blindness allowances represent a joint federal-provincial undertaking. However, in the case of the Blind Persons Act the federal share of costs amounts to 75 per cent as against 50 per cent under old age assistance. In view of this joint nature of the program, implementation of the present proposals will require agreement of the provinces, and we are hopeful that this will be forthcoming so the higher rates of benefit may be available to recipients of blindness allowances.
Before turning to the financial implications of our present proposal, I might mention that they envisage the continuation of a traditional feature of this legislation. I refer to the provision of higher income ceilings for recipients of blindness allowances as compared with recipients of old age assistance and disability allowances. As I say, this has long been an accepted feature of the Blind Persons Act, and the amendment to be brought before the house carries forward this arrangement.
In March, 1961 approximately 8,600 blind persons were in receipt of assistance at an annual cost to the federal treasury of just over $4 million. The additional costs attributable to the present amendment are estimated at slightly over $1,100,000 in a 12 month period, of which $825,000 would represent the federal share.
One further matter should be mentioned at this stage. As hon. members may be aware, the government has received representations regarding the special needs of groups such as the blind and the disabled. These are receiving consideration as part of our study of the general problem of public assistance, many aspects of which we feel warrant reassessment. As a next step in this process I propose to refer the whole subject to the national council of welfare, the setting up of which was forecast in the speech from the throne. To my mind an advisory group of this type has long been needed in Canada, and I am confident that the council will prove extremely useful in developing guide lines to improve further the effectiveness of our various assistance programs.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, the situation in regard to the blind always makes a special appeal to members of the house, as does that with regard to the totally disabled, and I think in the past all members have considered it a privilege to be able to share in action which in some way relieved that situation through, in this case, blindness allowances.
Indeed, Mr. Chairman, the legislative basis for this goes back a good many years and
Blind Persons Act
the resolution before us now, which we on this side will support, is designed to improve the position of those who qualify for this kind of assistance under that legislation. I do not believe it will meet all the requests that have been put forward by the Canadian national institute for the blind but as far as it goes it will, I am sure, be welcomed by them and by all other Canadians.
As the minister has pointed out, in this kind of assistance the federal authorities bear not 50 per cent, as is the case with other forms of assistance, but 75 per cent of the total expenditure. I think he said that the expenditure now covers over 8,000 eligible persons and amounts to about $5 million. I believe there are also provincial supplements in Ontario and in some western provinces.
I take it that the resolution we have before us will raise blindness allowances to $65 a month and the income limits to $115 for a single person and $195 for a married person. The same considerations that govern our attitude on this side toward the increase of pensions and allowances to a minimum of $75 govern us in respect of any steps we might take to improve the position of the blind through governmental assistance. Therefore we think that, as in these other situations, the amount should have been $75 and the income limits should have been raised proportionately.
The government has decided to make the amount $65, and so far as it goes we will support it; and with all the more pleasure because it will do something for a category of people in this country who are certainly entitled to everything we can do for them.


Mr. Pitman:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to add my congratulations to those of the leader of the official opposition and commend the minister for bringing in this additional payment to those who are blind. None of us, I think, believes that the increase is enough; nevertheless we feel it is an improvement, and for that reason we will support it.
I was very happy to hear the minister mention the fact that both the Canadian national institute for the blind and the Canadian council of the blind have been petitioning the government for some three years, as all hon. members know, with respect to the proposition that those who are blind need a special allowance or special payment which they call a cost of blindness payment. This increase, of course, will only affect approximately one third of those who are blind. Two thirds of those who are blind are selfsupporting. The position of the Canadian council of the blind and the Canadian national institute for the blind is simply that there is a cost of blindness which is above

Blind Persons Act
that covered under the Blind Persons Act and that there should be a payment of $25 a month to all those who are blind, whether they are in receipt of some considerable income or a small income as a result of their ability to employ themselves, or whether they are receiving a pension under the Blind Persons Act.
I was particularly heartened this afternoon when the Minister of National Health and Welfare said that this proposal was going to be turned over to the national council of welfare. I was interested in seeing in the speech from the throne that such a council was going to be established, because its opportunities are almost limitless. I think such a council can make Canada really a welfare state and not simply a handout state. I think the whole field of welfare with respect to the aged, blind persons and so on could very well receive scrutiny by such a council. The claims of each group could be justly weighed outside the arena of political controversy, and this is where the proposal of the Canadian national institute for the blind and the Canadian council of the blind could be properly investigated.
It is to be noted with interest that we recognize the needs of people in all fields. We recognize their needs, for example, as heads of families; therefore I believe it is right that we should recognize the needs of blind people. As all hon. members are aware, there are real costs in being blind. Their organizations estimate that it costs some 15 per cent simply for guiding and means of transportation such as taxis, which expense is not necessary for those of us who are lucky enough to be sighted. Their employment opportunities are limited, and certainly during the last couple of years when employment opportunities for all have been limited the possibilities of employment for blind people have been less. An employer who in a period of full employment was able and willing to find a place for someone who was blind is perhaps not able to do so under present circumstances. The competition for jobs may very well become much keener and, though I hope it will not, it may very well be true that it will be harder for blind people to find employment.
I should like to congratulate the national employment service and the various departments for the work they have done in trying to find jobs for blind people. However, blind people without incomes are finding it very difficult to get along. I know one couple who are blind, both of whom go out to work, but not because they want to do so. Actually, they are losing money by going out to work; but in order to feel useful, in order to feel a part of the community in which they live,

they do go out to work and accept the extra costs of being employed. They would really be better off financially to remain at home and receive the blind persons pension. I think that the blindness allowance permits these people to play a more active role and thus they can become better consumers.
I remind hon. members that these blind people, too, are part of the market for our industries.
Perhaps at no time in our history have the lessons of economics been more to the advantage of those who are less fortunate. We have finally come to realize that those who are at the bottom of the economic ladder do need help, not merely for their own sake but for the sake of all of us. I do not believe our welfare costs are too high. I think all of us were interested last year when the international labour office of the United Nations brought out a study which was entitled "The cost of social security from 1949 to 1957". We found that actually Canada spent a smaller portion of its national income on social security than most other industrial nations. Even West Germany, this so-called paragon of capitalism, spent some 20 per cent of its national income on social security, whereas Canada spent some 8.5 per cent. Probably the minister will indicate that this percentage has risen since 1957. Undoubtedly, the government will indicate it is partially responsible for this rise. None the less I think we are still behind many of the countries of the world in providing for those who are less fortunate. I find, for example, that Canada is tied with Chile in seventeenth place, and that Britain, France and the Scandinavian countries are far ahead of us. To those who would say that socialist countries tend to destroy their own standard of living, I would say this is not borne out by the fact that Sweden has overtaken Canada in so far as the standard of living is concerned, and now stands in second place. In that particular country, they do have a cost of blindness subsidy or a blindness allowance. This allowance is given without a means test, and that country simply recognizes the real cost of blindness.
I am sure that both the Canadian institute and the Canadian council for the blind have received the sympathetic ear of the minister. I hope, sir, this welfare council will receive the same sympathetic consideration. Its possibilities are, as I said, unlimited. I hope the council will look over the entire area of the welfare field and that they will assess what portion of Canada's national income should be assigned to welfare payments. I hope, too, the council will find some way of establishing certain criteria for the adjustment of these payments. As I mentioned last night, I think

the true factors should be need and productivity. For example, there should be an adjustment for the cost of living because, after all, this $10 increase is only an adjustment to meet the change in the cost of living since the last adjustment in the blind persons allowance was made. We could make these adjustments more frequent, more automatic and adjusted to productivity as well.
Other nations have dealt with the blind with some considerable sympathy. For example, in the United States aid to the blind is dispensed by various states to which the federal government contributes some 75 per cent of the first $20, and the federal government pays 50 per cent of the remainder of the pension up to $50 a month. I am sure all hon. members will agree that we have an opportunity to grant further assistance to those who are handicapped. I hope that we will pass this measure as quickly as we can. I hope that this money will soon be in the wallets of those who are blind. I hope that we will soon record this as a first step towards a more organized approach to the whole field of social welfare.


Mr. Broome:: Mr. Chairman, we will certainly pass this measure as quickly as possible but we will not pass it before the members on this side have an opportunity to reply to the distortions put forward by the hon. member for Peterborough. Hon. members over in that corner of the house are supposed to be the conscience of parliament, and to be the conscience of parliament all you have to do is say, this is good but it is not enough. It is a very easy thing to do. I remember back in 1958 there was a slight difference in what they said. At that time, they said, this is good but if hon. members of the opposition of that day had done these things they would still be in office. Now, they have reduced their contribution to a simple formula, this is good but it is not enough.
Well, Mr. Chairman, in so far as social justice payments in the province of British Columbia are concerned I would say that the old age assistance figures in 1960-61 are roughly 50 per cent higher than they were in 1956-57. Payments for blind persons allowances are roughly 65 per cent to 70 per cent higher in 1960-61 than they were in 1956-57. In so far as unemployment assistance is concerned, that is around 300 per cent higher in 1960-61 as compared with 1956-57. In other areas, too, the contributions of the province of British Columbia would average at least 50 per cent higher in 1960-61 as compared with 1956-57. The total amount of social justice expenditures is considerable, and from figures which I have just received I think it would be between $40 million and $50 million more in 1960-61 than in 1956-57.
26207-1-41i
Blind Persons Act
The hon. member for Peterborough comes along with the old cry about the position of Canada in so far as social justice payments are concerned in relation to other countries of the world. He ought to know, if he is doing his homework as a member of parliament, that the figures he is quoting are loaded. For instance, our figures do not include veterans benefits, whereas the figures for other countries do.


Mr. Martin (Timmins):: Will the hon. member permit a question?


Ernest James Broome: Yes.


Murdo William Martin: Does the hon. member mean that our payments to our veterans are a social security measure?


Ernest James Broome: I would say to the hon. member that these payments are lumped in with social security payments in the United Kingdom, Australia and so on, and the hon. member for Peterborough was comparing our payments with those payments. In certain areas the veterans payments do come into the social justice field, and I cite as an example war veterans allowances. Is this not social justice? What else would that be called?


Walter George Pitman: Are you disputing the United Nations figures?


Ernest James Broome: I say to the hon. member for Peterborough that debates in this house should not be composed of acid and vinegar; they should not be a means of heaping scorn and villainy on hon. members on this side of the house. The hon. member would get a much better reception from his electors if he were to try to introduce an element of fairness in his speeches. There are good things being done and these good things are being done at an accelerated tempo. We agree that these things should be done and it is for that reason we are offering the soundest measures possible.
I have not spoken on any of these resolutions introduced by the Minister of National Health and Welfare, but I agree that the particular resolution dealing with benefits for the blind is one which strikes home to everybody. The problems which the blind have are peculiar to themselves; they are problems for which we can all have sympathy, problems which go far beyond simply providing financial assistance. People who are blind are cut off from more of the good things of life than are any other persons. They need jobs and need opportunities to participate in various activities.
I welcome the minister's intention to refer this whole question to the national council of welfare, because I do not really believe that we can meet the problem simply by increasing the financial benefits. We have to

Blind Persons Act
treat this problem as something very special and I wonder whether the national council of welfare will be able to do that. I do not know, but I suggest a very specialized study must be made, a study which must be undertaken with the fullest sympathy for the people we are trying to help.
I have nothing further to add but I am sure another speaker from this side of the house will be able to give the hon. member for Peterborough a correct view of the facts. I hope the hon. member for Peterborough will take the facts to heart, do a little bit of study himself before entering debate in this house and thus arm himself with something better than a sense of criticism.
(Translation):


Mr. Pigeon:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words and add my congratulations to those extended to the minister who, with the co-operation of his colleagues, is granting a $10 pension increase per month to the blind, the aged and the disabled of this country.
Today, we are witnessing a complete change of attitude on the part of the opposition. When they were in power, they were stingy with the aged, the disabled and the blind, giving them very little, a mere crumb of $6 a month.
At that time, they had advisers. I would even venture to say that their policies were being dictated to them by high-ranking public servants who will soon be Liberal candidates at the next election, among whom we find Messrs. Maurice Lamontagne, Mitchell Sharp, Walter Gordon, Tom Kent, Charles Drury, James Coyne. Those were the people who told the Liberals what policies to follow, who told them not to increase the old age pension by more than $6 a month. "Just give them a few crumbs," they said. At the same time, they were advising the Liberal party to lend millions for the construction of a pipe line. Such was the arrogant manner in which the Liberal members treated the aged, the disabled and the blind of this country.
We are surprised at their attitude. Apparently, they have a new plan-a plan which they did not care to carry out when they were in power. Even there, they are inconsistent.
As proof of this, I shall quote an article by Jean Marc Poliquin, in Le Nouveau Journal of February 5, 1962:
While Mr. Pearson stated before that it would be absurd to raise the old age pension to $75 a month, his colleague Paul Martin now advocates an increase to that level.
Mr. Chairman, that is but one instance of the inconsistencies of these people who, when they were in power, were given the

wrong kind of advice by the men mentioned earlier and who, today, want to run under the Liberal party label.
Mr. Chairman, this government should be commended for having once more looked after the welfare of more than a million pensioners in this country. Moreover, their increased cheques will be printed in both languages.
May I say that the views of Mr. Andre Laurendeau do not represent those of the majority of French Canadians. The government has complied with the wish of the whole Canadian people by making this splendid gesture.
Why blame us for having made this gesture, when there has been complete silence for 22 years and complete inaction on the part of the Liberal party.
We should be suspicious of the advisers of the Liberal party I have named and who will run for parliament in the next election. They have caused hardships among our aged citizens, the blind and the invalids. They symbolize dictatorship. As a matter of fact, it was Mr. Walter Gordon who, incidentally, said to the people in the maritime provinces:
Move on, go away and settle in some other part of the country.
I believe, Mr. Chairman, that these people really represent dictatorship, which the Canadian people are fortunately going to abolish once for all, at the next election.
(Text):


Murdo William Martin: Mr. Chairman, we have had numerous illustrations in this house over the last year or so as to just how deeply hurt the Tories are by the fact that it is not a member of the government party who represents the good old former Tory riding of Peterborough. Yesterday we had a volley from the other side of the house, in which members of the front bench and cabinet ministers participated, giving strength to what I say. However, I have not been able to decide whether it is the words spoken by the hon. member that are hurting so much or the fact that it is he who represents that riding.
I was amazed when the hon. member for Vancouver South joined in the outcry today. I should like to tell him that not only is he in the wrong role but he is in the wrong play. I believe it was very wrong on the part of the hon. member for Vancouver South, for whom normally I have the greatest admiration.


Ernest James Broome: May I ask the hon. member a question?


Murdo William Martin: Certainly.


Ernest James Broome: Does he agree with the figures put forward by the hon. member for Peterborough in regard to the percentage of Canadian income expended on social justice payments, as given in the comparison made by the hon. member for Peterborough? I just want to know does the hon. member support those figures. Does he take the responsibility of saying those figures were correct?


Murdo William Martin: The hon. member seems very disturbed today. Had he waited a few moments more there would be no question in his mind as to that matter. The hon. member spoke about a reasonable amount, but does he think that the present $10 a month assistance increase is enough? Does he think it is enough to look after these people adequately, or is it reasonable to the extent that the Tory party considers this is a reasonable amount in order to get a reasonable number of votes in the next election?
I was amazed to hear him say that the veterans legislation is part of our social security system.


Ernest James Broome: On a point of privilege, I did not say "pensions". If the hon. member was listening he would know I did not say pensions.


Murdo William Martin: This is a very confusing day because I asked the hon. member a question on that very point.


Ernest James Broome: I said "war veterans allowances."


Murdo William Martin: I am sure the Canadian Legion would be interested in this new conservative approach which claims that veterans legislation is part of our social security system. I always thought it was based on the service given by veterans to our country.


Ernest James Broome: On a question of privilege; I wish the hon. member would quote me correctly. I said social justice payments, not social security.


Murdo William Martin: Maybe this is where all the confusion stems from. I have always looked upon our social security program as one that should be based on social justice, but maybe that is not the definition of the Conservative party. That is perhaps where all the confusion arises. If our veterans benefits and our veterans legislation are supposed to be thrown in hodgepodge in our social security program, why is there a different set of rules and a different yardstick for all this legislation? I think the hon. member has raised a matter that certainly warrants more clarification from the Conservative party.
As far as the remarks of the hon. membei for Peterborough are concerned, I agree
Blind Persons Act
wholeheartedly with every word he said. I thought he made an excellent, very mild and constructive speech in regard to the measure before the committee at the present time.


Mr. Pallell:: Even though it was not accurate.


The Chairman:: Shall the resolution carry?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, before the resolution carries there are one or two observations I should like to make about it. Before I make them, if Your Honour would allow me the same latitude as was allowed to hon. gentlemen on the other side of the chamber I should like to make one or two observations about some of the more or less irrelevant things that they said.
I deal first with the honourable and amiable member for Vancouver South who has never, of course, had the inestimable advantage of sitting in the opposition, but who will have that advantage soon if he can get re-elected, which I doubt. The hon. gentleman should have been here in the galleries in 1954, 1955 and 1956 and heard the gentle and honeyed tones used by his leader and the Minister of Finance in their criticism of the then government before he talked about acid and vinegar in debate, because there were no more bitter, no more intemperate speakers-


John Cameron Pallett: No more effective.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -who ever sat in this house than those two hon. gentlemen when they sat over here, and no two gentlemen with a more total disregard for the facts.


Mr. Churchill:: It was a very bad government in those days.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I might say that they carried that last characteristic to the treasury benches and have inflated it a good deal since arriving there. Of course, they have had more to work on since then, with their deficits and their 35 per cent increase in the expenditures that they were going to reduce before they went to the treasury benches. We remember that they were going to cut expenditures by half a billion dollars, and look at what has happened to the expenditures.


Gordon Minto Churchill: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, irrelevancy may be permitted when the hon. member is answering an hon. member who spoke just before him, but to go off on to this tangent miles away from the subject under discussion is surely out of order.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, on the point of order raised by the house leader, I think it would perhaps have been better if he had raised it when under the guise of discussing pensions for the blind the hon. member for

Blind Persons Act
Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm was speaking and making personal attacks upon war veterans, who were not bureaucrats at all, and upon people who served their country in the last war. Indeed, if there is any person in this house who would qualify in most respects for a pension for the blind, it is surely the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm, and it may be that he will be able to qualify under the means test after the next election.


An hon. Member:: What utter nonsense.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was dealing directly with the suggestion of the hon. member for Vancouver South, out of his vast parliamentary experience, to the hon. member for Peterborough who in my experience is one of the most courteous, though tough, debaters in this house. It seems to me that if hon. members on the other side of the chamber could just toughen their hides a little and not be quite so sensitive about criticism, if they would deal with the criticisms instead of talking about them as smears and deal with the problems in this country instead of pretending that the problems do not exist, there would be much less reason for criticism than there is at the present time. It may be that I have spent almost half as much time in irrelevancy as was spent by hon. members on the other side of the chamber-


Gordon Minto Churchill: You certainly have. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -and I want now to come back to being strictly relevant and deal with one point made by the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm, which was perhaps relevant. He referred to the $6. Of course, that is the stock in trade, indeed the only argument that hon. gentlemen opposite have, because they never attempt to deal with a situation; they just talk about $6. That is all they can say, and they use this $6 to cover up their own deficiencies. As I said the other evening in discussing the Old Age Security Act and the increase of $10 there, if any hon. member takes the trouble to examine the cost of living index and what has happened to the cost of living in the five years since 1957 he will see that the $10 increase now being made is the equivalent of the $6 increase that was then made-


An hon. Member:: Nonsense.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -in purchase power and in value. Every argument that hon. gentlemen used in 1957 about the $6 is equally applicable to the $10 in the context of the higher prices we already have, to say nothing of the prices that we can expect after the printing

presses have satisfied the extravagant demands of the Minister of Finance over the next few months.


Mr. Bell (Carleion):: That is just more mischief.


John Whitney Pickersgill: This is a fact that cannot be controverted and I notice that hon. gentlemen show no desire to controvert it. Hon. gentlemen said that the $6 was inadequate, but if it was inadequate then, this $10 is equally inadequate today. The fact of the matter is that it is inadequate, just as we admit that the $6 was away below what we would have liked to do for these people, away below what we should have liked to do for them. But we insist that in doing these things we should proceed in a responsible fashion, that we should make arrangements whereby the money to cover these payments-not all of them; not certain of these welfare payments, but the basic contributory pension- will be collected and contributed and the one thing related to the other and not made an inflationary charge upon the economy.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: You will be a long time in the opposition, don't you worry.


John Whitney Pickersgill: If that had been done; if the government had done what they promised to do in 1958-I put the promises of the Prime Minister on the record the other evening and I do not need to repeat them-if the government had, right after the 1958 election, done what they promised to do; if they had brought in a contributory scheme in 1959 and if it had been in operation today, as it could have been-there is no reason on earth why it could not have been-and if they had had any good will, interest or good faith it would have been done, but it was not.
What they did was to wait until the eve of an election and try to use the same promise for a second election. That is what they are doing. If they had established the contributory scheme to deal with the big problem of old age security, they would not have had to give a small $10 increase to the blind; they would have had a financial situation which would have enabled them to do much better than this. But having ignored their promises, having turned their backs on them, and having finally at the last minute produced the feeble constitutional excuse for failing to carry out those promises, they have to deal inadequately, as the Leader of the Opposition has pointed out, with the problem that is now before us.
Before the item passes I should like to put one or two questions to the minister which I hope he can clear up. One of them is this. Would he say whether or not in the experience of his department the incidence of blindness

is increasing or decreasing, whether this burden is growing with the years or whether it is to some extent decreasing in relation to the population as a whole as a result of better medical care and so on?
I have another question. If the scheme the minister referred to in connection with one of the related measures is far enough advanced, as I hope it is, perhaps he could answer this question. Would the minister say what proportion of the blind persons now receiving the means test payment would come under the government's contributory scheme as disabled persons if the government ever produces its scheme?
I would assume, of course, that a person born blind would not, but I would assume that someone who had contributed throughout his working years and, let us say, became blind at age 50 would qualify for a contributory disability pension under the government's new scheme. I should like to know if the minister's scheme is far enough advanced to permit him to give any indication on that point and whether, indeed, it is intended in the new scheme, if it ever sees the light of day, to deal with all persons who after they have begun to contribute should become blind and, if so, whether there would be any limitation on the period of contribution before they would qualify?
The minister may feel that these questions are far too detailed but if there is any view in the department with respect to this matter I think it would be desirable to have it.
I think it is important to remember that this measure by itself is not going to help one blind person in Canada. In every province there will have to be supplementary legislation enacted by the legislature. We have been told, of course, that the premiers of the provinces were only advised about the proposed change on January 18 so of course they had no advance notice to get ready for it. Presumably it will be some time before all provinces can take action. Some of the legislatures are not even in session and so some time will elapse before some of them can take the necessary complementary action.
In replying can the minister indicate how many of the provinces have already agreed to take the necessary action and whether he has any plans, not only with respect to this measure but with respect to the other two related measures, the one we just dealt with and the one with which we are about to deal, to have a conference with the provincial governments with respect to the action it is proposed that we should take?
I have a couple of other questions I wish to ask but I think perhaps I should let the minister have an opportunity to reply.
Blind Persons Act


Mr. McCleave:: Mr. Chairman, I shall be brief. I observe that other hon. gentlemen are eager to participate in the debate.
It strikes me that in dealing with an amend-to the Blind Persons Act a great deal of compassion should be voiced by hon. members of this house for these unfortunate people. As I listened to the last speaker, the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, I reached the following conclusion. If hon. members will recall the length of his discourse and the form it took they will feel, I am sure, that approximately 90 per cent of the hon. member's compassion was for the Liberal party-the old Liberal party-and only 10 per cent for the blind persons of Canada with whom we are dealing.
Having said that let me say this. On behalf of the many people in Halifax who lost their sight in the Halifax explosion of 1917, I wish to compliment the government on the step that is being taken to amend this legislation, and to say "well done". On behalf of those unfortunate people in my constituency I wish to thank particularly the Minister of National Health and Welfare for having announced that further studies of these problems will be made by the new council that is being established.
I trust that the debate will continue in an atmosphere of compassion. I urge hon. gentlemen not to speak of the mistakes of the past but rather to devote their attention to what can be done to alleviate the plight of blind Canadians who greatly require our assistance.


Mr. Peters:: Mr. Chairman, I did not intend to participate in this debate. I am of the opinion as I believe all Canadians are that the $10 increases in the amounts paid under the three acts with which we have been or will be dealing does not represent social justice. The sum of $10 is not a magically correct amount by which to increase pensions and allowances. I believe as I am sure all Canadians do that the increase of $10 is being introduced simply because it represents all the government can afford in an election year. The increase is introduced because it is an election year and that is all the government can afford.
I was surprised to hear hon. members of both the left and right wings of the Conservative party make unreasonable attacks on the hon. member for Peterborough. I ask this question: Is $10 an unreasonable increase under the three measures that are being considered? I say that the original level of the pension and allowances referred to is not being maintained. The increases in these pieces of legislation have not kept pace with the cost of living.

Blind Persons Act
The request of the blind for an increase of $25 is not unreasonable. I think it is pointless to talk about social justice. We are actually talking about social security which is at a level that cannot be described as making social justice possible, if in this context one relates the two concepts.
The international labour office of the United Nations indicates that Canada is only in the seventeenth place among countries that provide social security.
Mr. Pallet!: A complete distortion.


William Arnold Peters: The source of that information is the international labour office of the United Nations.


Mr. Jones:: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. The hon. member has referred to a figure. I invite the hon. gentleman to identify the report to which he refers. If I correctly understand what he refers to, it is stated in the report that the figures contained therein are not to be used for comparison between countries. I direct the hon. gentleman's attention to page 5 of the report.


William Arnold Peters: I believe the hon. member is right if he is referring to the pamphlet from which I am reading but the facts appear in quotation marks and are taken from other sources. The document referred to is entitled "The Cost of Social Security, 1949-57" published by the international labour office of the United Nations in Geneva. I am not in a position to say whether the figures should have been released. In any event I do not think the hon. gentleman would suggest the figures are wrong.


Henry Frank Jones: To clear the matter up, Mr. Chairman, let me say I think the hon. member has sufficiently identified the report. However, at page 5 thereof it is stated that the figures contained therein are not to be used for comparison between countries.


Ernest James Broome: That is true. Those were the figures used by the hon. member for Peterborough, too.


William Arnold Peters: I do not understand why these figures are not to be used and why that request is made on page 5. In fact I have not seen the original document and was not in a position to know that, but I do not think it really matters. No one suggests the figures are wrong and certainly Canada's position is not enviable.
When the Canadian old age pensioners, the blind and disabled are offered $10 as an increase, they know why. We are not saying that this sum is necessary, reasonable or adequate. It is just a nice round figure and we are happy the increase will be given.

It is unfair to say that the hon. member for Peterborough is being unreasonable when he puts forward the request of the blind that $25 be given to all blind people to offset the increased cost of living. In a pamphlet put out by the Canadian council of the blind some of the costs are pointed out. I will read what they say about the matter. They are in an excellent position to tell the Canadian people why these facts are correct in relation to the blind because they represent a large majority of all the blind people in Canada. This is what they say:
A totally blind Canadian may be able to follow full time employment. Except in rare instances, for perfectly valid reasons, he must spend about 15 per cent of his earnings for guiding services. A blind housewife is generally an excellent cook and housekeeper carrying on quite normally in her own home. Her main problem is shopping. As she must order by telephone and have her goods delivered, her grocery bill or that of any blind person living alone, is easily 10 per cent higher than it would be if she could herself scan the shelves of the supermarkets and go bargain hunting. Blind people of all ages and walks of life encounter similar problems, simply because they are unable to see. Most of them literally cannot afford to be blind but they have no choice in the matter. Adjustment, training and rehabilitation are doing a great deal to increase the competence of the blind socially, vocationally and recreationally, but nothing can alter the fact that it costs money to be blind.
We would not be doing a service to this country if we were to do as government members are doing, and there are so many of them that they are obliged to parrot what the minister says. He is making the statement that $10 is the most that these people are going to be given, but he does not say exactly why. I will suggest the reason, and it is no secret. I suggest that this is all we can afford to give them and the government has a responsibility to examine the treasury and make the allowances in this regard. The previous government decided in dollars and cents how much the increase was going to be and I think this is something the government is obliged to do. But when we talk about social justice I think we should read on in this pamphlet put out by the Canadian council of the blind. In it they say this:
Basically, an allowance which would assist blind people in meeting the expense of their blindness would help to equalize their position in society with their sighted competitors.
This would be social justice, Mr. Chairman. I was surprised that a man whom I would consider to be a very progressive member of the Conservative party, namely the hon. member for Vancouver South, would confuse the two issues of social justice and social security. I am in agreement that social security under our form of government will always take into consideration what the country appears to be able to afford to pay

and that this amount quite often has no relationship to what social justice would be if we were going to get the best possible in order to overcome a particular problem. Certainly in the case of blindness, no matter how much money we gave them, no matter how high their standard of living became, there would always be a cost of blindness that could not be overcome with money or with assistance.


Ernest James Broome: I rise on a question of
privilege, Mr. Chairman.


William Arnold Peters: Just one moment-


Ernest James Broome: I am rising on a question of privilege which can be raised immediately. I have not disagreed with anything in relation to the special needs of the blind. What the hon. member is failing to consider is that my disagreement is with regard to the presenting of what I consider to be false figures by the hon. member for Peterborough.


Paul Raymond Martineau: I believe the hon. member has not raised a question of privilege but rather a debating point. If there are any corrections to be made, I would suggest that they be made at the end of the speech of the hon. member who has the floor.


William Arnold Peters: I believe that the hon. member for Peterborough, when he pointed out this need for costs of blindness allowances uniformally paid and paid to everybody who is blind because of the disability incurred, was bringing to the attention of the country something that would fall within the scope of social justice and therefore is something that is to be highly desired by the Canadian people. I am sure we are interested in developing as high a degree of social justice as possible. We do this, of course, by social security. I think it was not fair that both the left wing and the right wing of the Conservative party should have attacked the hon. member for Peterborough on this account.
I suggest the government should give consideration to this matter. It may mean that we in Canada are going to have to change our social security system. The minister spoke of the national welfare council and the operations of it. I hope that this is one of the things that it will take into consideration. In this debate we have been very quiet with respect to bringing forward new ideas concerning the social security set-up of Canada, as we all know that we are only waiting to pass this legislation and then we shall be going out on the hustings and facing an election. We are aware of this situation. Therefore nothing new is required to be introduced at this time. However, the minister 26207-1-42
Blind Persons Act
should give consideration to discussing such things as the cost of blindness when he has the opportunity to introduce this subject to the national council of welfare. Even if these figures should not have been presented we hope that Canada will be higher on the scale in the future, whatever the scale may be, than are some of the South American countries which we have assumed have not had a standard of living and a social security program that would be in keeping with our gross national product.


Henry Frank Jones: During the course of this debate some remarks have been made and some figures have been given which make it necessary at this time to set down on the record some of the facts. The hon. member who has just spoken was referring to a situation in Chile, I think it was, and referring to a list he had on which, according to his statement, Canada was seventeenth, having regard to the percentage of gross national product spent on national security.
I happen to have seen the leader of his party on national television when he made a similar assertion. I therefore took the trouble to look into that particular matter, and found the report to which he referred is the one I hold in my hand, entitled, "The Cost of Social Security 1949-57". I would ask you to mark the cut-off date, Mr. Chairman. It is put out by the international labour office and is dated Geneva, 1961. The hon. member could get one for 18 shillings. I think that is the cost of it. When he gets one, perhaps he might turn to page 5 of that report, where he would find the following:
As the development of the social security system in most countries has not reached its final stage, and the cost elements for the various social security branches differ, the financial data presented in the present volume are of themselves insufficient to permit an evaluation of the efforts made in the different countries in the field of social security.
Right in the very report itself warning is given against using these figures for purposes of comparison. It is interesting to note that in this list contained in this report the United States is somewhere about 25th, we are 17th and Chile is above both Canada and the United States, according to this comparison. But as the report properly points out, this data was not presented for purposes of comparison.


William Arnold Peters: It does not say you cannot use it for that reason.


Henry Frank Jones: I did not hear that remark.
Mr. Pallet!: He said that it does not say you cannot use it.


Henry Frank Jones: No. Hon. members can use it for that purpose if they wish to do so but

Blind Persons Act
they must use it subject to the opinion that is expressed in1 the report itself as to its value. If they wish to be honest and to be thought to be honest throughout this country they would draw to the people's attention the limitations placed on this report by the authors themselves.
In the remarks of the hon. member for As-siniboia a great deal was said about $100 a month. Then, in his remarks the hon. member who has just spoken asked whether $10 was a reasonable amount by which to supplement these pensions. I thought I might place on the record some of the facts with regard to this matter. I have a survey of the situation as it was in 1961. Going from east to west we find that Newfoundland provides aid through general assistance as required. I have no information with regard to Prince Edward Island. Nova Scotia provides aid through general assistance as required, as does New Brunswick. Quebec instituted a program in 1961 which provides up to $10 per month across the province, up to $25 a month in cities and towns and up to $40 a month in metropolitan centres. Total maximum payments thus range from $65 to $95.
The situation in Ontario is that the province shares in additional payments by municipalities up to $20 a month. Manitoba provides aid through the program of social allowances on a budget deficit basis. Allowances depend on expenditures for various budgetary items up to set maxima. I will skip Saskatchewan for the time being. In 1961 the situation in British Columbia was that a provincial supplementary allowance program provided aid to recipients of old age security, old age assistance, blind persons allowances and disabled persons allowances up to $24 a month on a means test basis. British Columbia has now instituted a new plan effective January 1, 1962. In 1961 the situation in Alberta was that there was a provincial supplementary allowance to recipients of old age security, old age assistance and blind persons allowances up to $15 a month on a means test basis.
Let us look at the Saskatchewan situation, the home of the C.C.F. whose members are making all the noise in the far corner of the house. In 1961 there was a provincial supplementary allowance to recipients of old age security or blind persons allowances-I know hon. members will be interested to hear the amount-of $2.50 a month where total income did not exceed $900. Where income was less than $65 a month supplementation was provided to bring the income up to this amount. Thus the maximum supplementation for a single person was $10 a month. We have payments of $24 a month in British Columbia

and $14 a month in Alberta alongside this situation in Saskatchewan which I have described.
Under the spur and inspiration of the Minister of National Health and Welfare, who has done such a wonderful job in his department, the provinces have instituted what they call a budget deficit program of payments whereby budgets are drawn up so that the needs of the recipients are tested according to an accepted formula in each of the provinces.


William Arnold Peters: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, is the hon. member relating what he is saying to the blind pensions debate? I ask this question because he referred to a speech made by the hon. member for Assiniboia last night on this subject, who did not speak on this subject at all but rather on another subject altogether. I am wondering whether the figures the hon. member is giving are related to the allowances given to blind persons by the various provinces.


Henry Frank Jones: Apparently the hon. member has not been listening to what I have been saying. I will give the figures again as to the situation in Saskatchewan. In 1961 there was a provincial supplemental allowance to recipients of old age security or blind persons allowances of $2.50 where total income did not exceed $900. I think that is related to blind persons. As I have mentioned, as a result of the inspiration of our Minister of National Health and Welfare a budget deficit basis has been accepted throughout most of the country as a proper basis for providing these allowances. Under the inspiration of the Conservative Minister of National Health and Welfare Saskatchewan has altered the situation there. Effective April 1, 1961, their supplemental allowances were placed on a budget deficit basis. Allowances depend on expenditures for various budgetary items up to set maxima. In general, a single person can be assisted up to $75.65 plus an amount for fuel.
I think hon. members will perhaps be interested in knowing what the actual maxima are for the various items for a single person. The amounts are as follows: Food, $23.50; shelter, $35; clothing, $5.50; light and cooking, $6; water, $2.75; household supplies and laundry, $1.30; personal care, $1.60, making a total of $75.65, plus an allowance for fuel. One just has to go to the province of Alberta to find that in general a person there can be assisted up to the amount of $80.70 plus an amount for fuel.
I thought that placing these figures on the record might help to straighten out the situation.


Murdo William Martin: Will the hon. member permit a question?


Henry Frank Jones: The resolution before us now is a positive contribution to the welfare of the people of Canada. It is in keeping with the declarations of the Conservative party and with the forward, progressive outlook that the Conservative party has always taken with regard to the care of those who by reason of age, blindness or for some other reason are not able to take full care of themselves.


Murdo William Martin: Will the hon. member permit a question before he sits down? If the hon. member and the Conservative party are as disturbed as they appear to be about the lack of consideration by the government of Saskatchewan, can he inform the committee why they did not run a candidate in the Weyburn by-election?


Henry Frank Jones: Unlike the C.C.F. party, the Conservative party believes that there should be local autonomy.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Henry Frank Jones: You asked for this and you are going to get it. According to the C.C.F. constitution, it is the brass at the top who say who is going to run in a constituency. We do not believe in that in the Conservative party. We believe in the grass roots deciding such matters.


James Ernest Pascoe: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Saskatoon has set the record straight in some respects and I should like to set it straight in regard to another aspect which I think should be mentioned. First, however, on behalf of the blind persons in my constituency and their families I certainly want to express appreciation to the Minister of National Health and Welfare for bringing in this resolution so early in the session. I should like to read again the words of the resolution.
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Blind Persons Act to increase to $65 per month the maximum amount of allowance in respect of which payments may be made to the provinces under the provisions of that act, and to increase the total amount of allowable income ... by $180 a year in the case of an unmarried person and $360 a year in the case of a married person.
I hope the provinces will act just as quickly as the Minister of National Health and Welfare has to bring this into effect so that the increased payments can be made as soon as possible.
The minister pointed out in his remarks, Mr. Chairman, that like old age assistance the blindness allowance represented a joint federal-provincial undertaking. However, in the case of the Blind Persons Act the federal share of the cost amounts to 75 per cent 26207-1-42i
Blind Persons Act
as against 50 per cent under the Old Age Assistance Act. I just want to emphasize the fact that Ottawa pays 75 per cent. I have in my hand a pamphlet issued by the department of social welfare and rehabilitation in the province of Saskatchewan with regard to blind persons allowances. Reference is made in the pamphlet to those who are eligible, the benefits received and so on, but nowhere in the pamphlet is there any reference to the federal government. There is one reference which indicates the federal government bears the cost of examination for blind persons, so there is no charge to the applicant. This is the only reference in the whole pamphlet issued last week by the Saskatchewan government with regard to blind persons allowances. I think we should emphasize the fact that Ottawa pays 75 per cent of the cost in this regard.
I have received many representations concerning the special needs of blind persons. Today we heard the minister state that the federal government, too, has received representations and is acting on them. I was interested in the minister's remarks to the effect that these representations are receiving consideration and are part of our study of the general problem of public assistance, many aspects of which we feel warrant reassessment. As the next step in this process the government proposes to refer the whole subject to the national council of welfare, the setting up of which was forecast in the speech from the throne. I think, Mr. Chairman, this advisory group has been long needed in Canada. I agree with the minister that it will prove extremely useful in developing further program to improve the effectiveness of the government's various assistance programs. The only reason I joined in this debate, Mr. Chairman, was to point out that the federal government pays 75 per cent of the cost of this assistance to blind persons.


Mr. Valade:: I should like to take a small portion of the time of the committee to correct a wrong impression left by the hon. member for Timiskaming when he said that the only increase in the pension since the scheme was introduced has been a $10 increase. This is utterly false because when the Conservative government first came into office in 1957 they granted a $10 increase. Today, they are granting another $10 increase, so in fact the total increase to the Canadian people has been $20. I just wanted to correct that wrong impression left by the hon. member for Timiskaming.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Like other members, Mr. Chairman, I did not intend to participate in this debate except to say I am quite sure it is the feeling of each of us that when it

Blind Persons Act
comes to payments such as these our thoughts should be centred upon our humanitarian feelings for the individuals themselves. Reference was made to this by the hon. member for Halifax, and I join with him in suggesting that this should be the base upon which our feelings rest.
The parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs dealt with a particular I.L.O. report which was referred to by one of my colleagues. I do not have the document with me to refer to it in detail, but I listened carefully to what the hon. member for Saskatoon said, and according to my memory what he assigned to the report and what the report said were two entirely different things. I thought he, in fact, distorted, altered or paraphrased the words in the report to give the impression he wanted to give.


Gordon Minto Churchill: No.


Charles Benjamin Howard: If my memory is not correct-


Gordon Minto Churchill: It is very faulty.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Very faulty?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Your memory.


Charles Benjamin Howard: The Minister of Veterans Affairs should be the last one to make any comment about faulty memories. He is certainly the one minister who is an authority in that regard. From his own personal experience he should not engage in accusations of faulty memories against other members. If I did not correctly take down the words which the hon. member for Saskatoon read from that document, he can correct me and I shall apologize. That document made reference to evaluations and indicated the relevant positions of certain countries, and the conclusion was drawn that conditions in those countries would not allow for a full evaluation or, a comparative evaluation of the position of social security measures in those countries. They made no reference whatsoever to using those figures and countries for comparison significance.
In that regard, when the parliamentary secretary made reference to people in this party being honest, and wanting to be honest, he should have looked in a mirror himself and decided whether he was distorting things.
This is not the point with which we should be concerning ourselves. I am not interested in getting into a great argument about whether Canada is in the 17th, 16th or first position in a comparison with other countries, nor do I think we should concern ourselves with casting aspersions against provinces, stating that one province is in such a position relative to another. We should be concerning ourselves with what is before us, solely on a humanitarian basis. We should

be asking ourselves whether it is the correct thing to do and whether or not $10 is something which really means anything. I submit, as have others, that there is no logical reason why $10 is considered an adequate, a correct, or an incorrect amount of money. Rather, it is a question, as the hon. member for Timiskaming pointed out, of trying to operate within the budget structure of this country -I might add I am sure the Minister of Finance is in the same position-to see what amount of money can be granted as an increase. To try and emotionalize this by saying it is social justice is just nonsense. It is an attempt to provide some degree of social security for these people.
I do not believe that blind persons, old age pensioners and disabled persons, or any others in our society who find themselves in an inadequate financial position because of age, infirmity or some affliction, should be expected to remember the cliches and phrases used by the Prime Minister when he referred to the Liberal party and mentioned "six buck Harris," and the "six buck boys". That is not something with which our elder people should be concerned. They are not concerned whether it is "six buck Harris," or "saw buck John", or whether it is "promising Paul" who is going to be remembered by them.


John Cameron Pallett: "Flinching Frank."


Charles Benjamin Howard: What parliament should be concerned with is how we can marshal the forces of the country to ensure fairness and equality for these people. I submit we cannot do it by granting $10 now and $10 again, every time we seem to be approaching a federal election.
Recently I said facetiously to one of my colleagues that perhaps what I should do is introduce a bill to amend the legislation which lays down that an election must be held every five years, so that it would provide by law for an election every year. If that were done we would have the greatest old age pensions and blind pensions of the age, regardless of which party was in office. At the moment our attitude towards these people is put on the basis of whether or not the granting of increases comes close to an election.


Jay Waldo Monteith: There are one or two
things I should put on the record before this debate comes to an end. I would like to add another paragraph or two, which appear on page 5 of the I.L.O. publication. I quote:
However, the committee recognized the difficulties involved in making valid international comparisons . .. The I.L.O. inquiries, however, are universal in their coverage so that comparability between countries is rendered more difficult.

Then there is the paragraph mentioned by the hon. member for Saskatoon.


William Arnold Peters: That does not say it is impossible.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Not for you.


Jay Waldo Monteith: Mr. Chairman, in this index of countries which we have been told should not be used for world-wide comparison purposes, we are told Canada ranks 17th and, as the hon. member for Saskatoon pointed out, the United States comes 24th or 25th. I think it should be stressed that these are 1957 figures at which time expenditures on health and social welfare in Canada were 8.5 per cent of the net national income. In 1960 they were 12.2 per cent of the national income. Of course, in the intervening years there has been a Conservative administration in Ottawa which has done a great deal in the social welfare field.
I should also like to point out that the article which the member of the N.D.P. wishes to use for comparison purposes states that some countries, for instance, reported war veterans allowances and war pensions in this sort of structure, whereas they were not asked for that.
The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate asked one or two questions as to the number of blind persons. In 1951-52 the number was 8,079 and in March, 1960, it was 8,671, a slight increase; but of course there has been an overall increase in population. He also wanted to know more details of our plan; but all I can say, Mr. Chairman, is that I shall not be too specific about it, but I expect it will be along the lines of the United States system concerning disability.
The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate also said that this $10 increase was comparable to the $6 increase in 1957. I have before me a cost of living index which shows a figure of 121.9 in 1957. In 1951, at the time the $40 provision was passed, the cost of living index was 113.7, a difference of 8.2, or a rise of 7.1 per cent. The cost of living index in March, 1961, was 129.1, and the index in 1957 was 121.9, an increase of 7.2 per cent. When the $6 was granted the increase was 7.1 per cent, but now an increase of $10 is being given when the rise is 7.2 per cent.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That, of course, is a year ago.


Jay Waldo Monteith: In October the cost of living index was down to 124.2.


John Whitney Pickersgill: What about December, 1961?


Jay Waldo Monteith: I do not have that figure here but I think I have answered the
Blind Persons Act
questions that were asked of me. I would be very happy to see this resolution going through, and maybe the disability resolution also this afternoon.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is just one question. I should like to ask the minister if he could say how many were covered in the first year of the operation of pensions for the blind, which was, I suppose, 1937-38?


Jay Waldo Monteith: I do not have those figures here but I would be glad to have them for the hon. member at the time of first reading.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Second reading.


Jay Waldo Monteith: I am sorry-second reading.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think it would be quite interesting if the minister, on second reading, could give us a little picture. I believe all of us would like to know what progress has really been made with regard to the problem of blindness, of which this is an important aspect although I am sure the minister, who is also the minister of health, would say it was not the biggest aspect. The biggest aspect is our desire to prevent blindness or relieve it. It would be helpful if the minister could give us a broad picture of what the prospects are in this whole field, a field in which I believe there is a tremendous amount of interest all over the country. It would be helpful to have that on the record.


Jay Waldo Monteith: I shall be very glad to do so.


Charles Benjamin Howard: I now have the publication from the library. I think I have the correct document. It is from the international labour office and is titled "The Cost of Social Security, 1949-1957". Is this the one to which the minister was referring?


Jay Waldo Monteith: I beg your pardon.


Charles Benjamin Howard: It is from the international labour office and is headed "The Cost of Social Security, 1949-1957."


Jay Waldo Monteith: Yes.


Charles Benjamin Howard: It was printed in Geneva in
1961.	I take it it is the same document and I should like to clear up the point raised by the hon. member for Saskatoon, which was dealt with earlier by my colleague from Timis-kaming. On page 5 it states:
The X.L.O. committee of social security experts, at its meeting held in Geneva (January-February 1959), recognized the significance and usefulness of the international comparisons carried out by the office and emphasized the importance of continuing the inquiries on the cost of social security.

Blind Persons Act
The point I wish to make here in respect to that, reading the whole thing in its entirety, is that the I.L.O. committee recognized, as it says-
-the significance and usefulness of the international comparisons carried out by the office and emphasized the importance of continuing the inquiries on the cost of social security.
The committee said it was useful and beneficial to do these things. It goes on to say:
The views were also expressed in the committee that the presentation of relative measures and indices is of particular value.
It continues:
However, the committee recognized the difficulties involved in making valid international comparisons and it therefor appears appropriate to make some general comments on the data presented in part II of the present volume which is devoted to comparative tables.
Here I think it sums up the usefulness of these international comparisons. The people who prepared this particular document recognized the significance and usefulness of international comparisons, the importance of continuing further inquiries, the need to recognize difficulties involved in drawing those comparisons and made comments with respect to the tables themselves, which are contained in part II of the document. This is vastly different from the picture painted to the committee by the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs. According to his doctrine or approach to this sort of thing, the document which I have in my hand and to which he referred is useless for the purposes of our discussion here. I think this is not borne out by what the document itself says.
There are some important references and matters to which they refer which should be taken into consideration in drawing these particular comparisons. The hon. member for Timiskaming and the hon. member for Peterborough mentioned that Canada stood in 17th place, I think it was, not from any point of view of trying to degrade ourselves or degrade our country but only from the point of view of indicating to the committee that, while we have concern for the problems confronting those people who are blind, we should not be so complacent about it as to think we are thereby treating our indigents and our people with infirmities and difficulties in any better or more laudable way than they are treated in other countries.
This was the gist of their approach and I think they are sincerely trying to show, from one point of view, what this parliament should be concerned with, and their remarks should not have been subjected to ridicule by both the hon. member for Vancouver South and the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs.

Let us consider some of the things which must be taken into account in drawing these comparative figures. I read from one part of page 5 of this document which just comes to my eye. The preliminary part deals with some of the factors which must be taken into consideration. It says here:
In addition, the cost of protection against a given contingency varies with the incidence of the contingency; for instance, a country with a high level of unemployment and in which large sums are spent on unemployment protection, or a country which has suffered severe epidemics and has thus incurred heavy expenditure on health services, cannot be considered more advanced in social security than-other things being equal-another country-
Canada is a country which, for argument's sake, spends large sums of money on unemployment protection. Although this report ends in 1957 and perhaps would not take into account the full impact of the Conservative government upon Canada's economy, it would take into account some of the measures that have been instituted in the field of unemployment protection. Thus we must consider whether Canada should be in 17th place or in a different position relative to other countries with respect to the incidence of unemployment and the amounts spent upon it.
I do not think we can over-emphasize this particular question because it is of importance. But, this is not the matter concerning us here. What is concerning us to a larger extent than anything else, and what was of primary concern to us in connection with the measure just passed, the old age assistance and the old age pension-and I certainly would not exclude myself from this, or attempt to exclude anybody else-was an expected national event that might take place soon. This was the gist of it. This was the reason the Prime Minister, in that gleeful way of his, was able to chortle about the $10 increase to the old age pension and refer to the six bucks boys, drawing comparisons on the amount of the increase. With regard to the amount of the increase, I submit that you cannot argue any more for a $10 increase than you can for a $6 increase, or a $25 increase or any other set amount of increase whether it is to a pension, for the blind, for old age or anything else.
Those increases are influenced first by the budgetary picture of the country. We do not know what that is, except that we are deeply in debt and will undoubtedly go more deeply into debt. Perhaps one of the reasons for the reluctance of the Minister of Finance is that he is going to have to end up with income tax increases to help pay for some of these things we are doing now, and he is not telling the

country about it. But this is one of the factors which influences increases of $10, $20 or any other set amount of money.
The other factor which has influenced increases to pensions is whether or not there is going to be an election. Unfortunately, that has been the history of these sorts of social security pensions ever since they were instituted. Governments in office have used them as a means of gaining support at election time by increasing the amount and then saying, "Aren't we nice fellows; we gave you $10. That nasty old other party", whoever it might happen to be, "only gave you $5 or $6. We are better. We bribed you with a larger amount of money. Won't you now give us your vote?" This is true and this is the thing which has been of far greater concern to us sitting here in this parliament than the question of social justice itself. It is a question of social security coupled with an election time, not a desire to meet these problems and deal with them from a humanitarian point of view.
The minister indicated that this question will be referred to a council for some sort of guidance. Perhaps this council will come up with some ideas which will allow us to put these things on a base which is more humanitarian and less political. I sincerely hope this will be the case.


Jay Waldo Monteith: Mr. Chairman, may I just make one correction. I indicated earlier that there was an 8.2 point rise between 1951 and 1957, which was 7.1 per cent, and a $6 increase. It is actually a 7.2 point rise between 1957 and the present time. It is a 5 per cent rise, and a $10 increase.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I thought the hon. gentleman gave the figures for a year ago, and not for the present time.


Jay Waldo Monteith: March, 1961, and the cost of living in October, 1961 had gone down to 124.2 instead of 129.1.


John Whitney Pickersgill: This is February, 1962.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Shall the resolution carry?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether the committee would agree to proceeding with the other resolution in the name of the Minister of National Health and Welfare and then we could take the bill on this one, as well as the others, tomorrow?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, it is five o'clock. We would be glad to give first reading to this bill, but some of us have something to say on the other measure and I think we should proceed according to the rules.
Proposed Adult Education Council


Gordon Minto Churchill: I hope your remarks will be more relevant than they were when dealing with this one.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. Monleiih (Perlh) thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-56, to amend the Blind Persons Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



THE ROYAL ASSENT

Mr. Speaker:: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received the following c ommunication:



GOVERNMENT HOUSE

[Stage Direction]
Ottawa, February 7, 1962
Sir:
I have the honour to inform you that the Honourable Patrick Kerwin, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, acting as Deputy of His Excellency the Governor General, will proceed to the Senate chamber today, the 7th February, at 5.45 p.m. for the purpose of giving royal assent to a certain bill.
I have the honour to be, sir,
Your obedient servant, Esmond Butler Secretary to the Governor General
Mr. Speaker:: It being five o'clock the house will now proceed to a consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely notices of motion and public bills.



EDUCATION


Walter George Pitman: That the government give consideration to the establishment of a national adult education research council to gather information and to promote all forms of adult education whether academic or vocational and whether sponsored by private or public bodies and to co-ordinate these programs and to promote the creation of a permanent centre for the scientific study of education for adults in Canada.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I believe the purposes of the resolution are quite clear. The first purpose is to establish a body or council to be known as the national adult education research council.
The purposes of the council would be threefold. The first would be to gather information about all forms of adult education now in existence in this nation. Second, to promote all forms of adult education. There are various forms of adult education now in existence many of which are not well known and require a national focus such as the

Proposed Adult Education Council sports and physical fitness council is attempting to provide in the area of sports. A third purpose would be to co-ordinate the various types of adult education. There are some forms of adult education which are not receiving sufficient attention simply because there is a great deal of overlapping and I believe there is necessity for co-ordination in this entire area.
Finally, the purpose of the resolution is to promote the establishment of a permanent centre for the scientific study of adult education. I believe this resolution can be improved and I am convinced that hon. members can contribute much by their discussion. There are many hon. members who are interested in the subject and I trust the resolution will arouse considerable debate.
With regard to the constitutionality of my proposal I wish to make it clear at the outset that none of the purposes I have mentioned involves an interference in the rightful activities of the provinces in the field of education. There is no suggestion of the federal government setting up courses or establishing curricula. It in no way involves the existing structure of education, as a provincial matter, in primary or secondary schools. It does not in any way involve itself in language, religion or culture.
The resolution recognizes the fact that the federal government is already active in many forms of adult education. I have already mentioned the sports and physical fitness council which is really a form of education. I also remind hon. members of the various activities engaged in by departments of government including the Department of National Health and Welfare, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of External Affairs. These departments engage in activities which can only be described as relating to the field of adult education.
Many hon. members in this house will remember better than I the important work undertaken by the Department of Veterans Affairs at the end of world war II when many veterans were enabled to take advantage of training and education as a result of the activities of that federal department.
We all know that the Department of Labour is actively engaged in promoting adult education or training under the vocational training act. Under schedule M of the act the department engages in the training of the unemployed; under schedule P, in the training of persons in agricultural subjects, homemaking, forestry and fishing, except in Ontario and Quebec; under schedule R, in the training of disabled persons and under schedule K, in training and educational courses within our armed forces.


It is interesting to remind ourselves of the extent to which the federal government, as the main tax collecting level of government, benefits from retraining, rehabilitating and higher education standards.
I wish to make clear at this point that I use the term "adult education" in the wider sense to include any form of activity which brings about a higher level of skill or of general awareness to any individual in the nation.
I believe we should consider to what extent adult education used in that sense benefits the federal government in its role as the major tax collecting authority. For example, a study could be made of the extent to which the nation has benefited simply from taxation of those veterans who, through their veterans benefits, were able to take higher education in this country at the end of world war II. Some who are earning between $10,000 and $20,000 a year might have been earning only $4,000 or $5,000 a year had training not been made available to them through the department and our veterans legislation.
Mr. Howard Rush of the New York Times reports that for every dollar the United States government invests in rehabilitation, it receives back ten in the federal taxes paid by those rehabilitated into employment. For 1961, he reports that the estimated earnings of those rehabilitated during the first year of employment will be about $180 million as compared with $20 million before rehabilitation. Indeed, the cost of rehabilitation was scarcely more than the cost of keeping them on welfare.
May I now turn to the purposes of the resolution. Let me state immediately that my inspiration for this resolution came largely from reading accounts of the recent national conference on adult education which took place in Montreal last fall sponsored jointly by "l'lnstitut canadien d'Education des adultes" and the Canadian association for adult education. I know there are in this house a number of hon. gentlemen who are members of these bodies.
The following are some of the recommendations and proposals which came out of the committees at this conference which I feel will be of interest to hon. members of this house:
1.	We must establish on a national scale, a co-ordinated program of adult education and professional training.
2.	We need research at national and community level into needs and motivations of these deprived adults.
3.	Government, private enterprise, labour and educators should make an inventory of

their programs to ensure co-ordination and complete coverage in this sector of adult education.
4.	The institutions through which adult education takes place need to be strengthened and co-ordinated, both nationally and regionally; residential centres, for example, need to be developed and industry must recognize that such centres will be effective only if it was prepared to support them.
I therefore suggest that the first purpose of the council would be to gather information, due to the vast number of activities in each community. Hon. members are perhaps more keenly aware of this than are others because we receive invitations from many of these organizations. One sometimes wonders how we can possibly attend to the needs of these various agencies; and yet, we really do not know the full or total effect of these agencies. Really we do not know what areas are being covered and what gaps there still are, as a result. Of course, the association for adult education has done its best to gather this information but I think this matter needs a national focus in the same way that the Canadian amateur hockey association and various amateur sports associations have tried in the past to keep in touch with all the activities in the various sports fields. I think all of us in this house agree that there was a need for a national focus in this particular area. I think adult education is an area which needs this kind of treatment as well.
In a review of adult education as far back as 1950-there is a review being prepared for 1960 but unfortunately it is not available as yet-is given a list of 126 different agencies. I therefore put it to this house that before there can be any promotion of adult education or co-ordination of it we must find out exactly what these agencies are doing, what they regard as their purpose, and what they feel are the boundaries of their activities.
I have already mentioned various departments of the federal government. When we look at the organization of adult education at the provincial level we find nothing but a patchwork quilt. For example, in Saskatchewan, we find an association for adult education which just became a reality in 1960. However, there is no such association in Alberta. In Nova Scotia adult education is largely dealt with by or is a part of the department of health and recreation. It is spread over various departments of the provincial government in Quebec. In Ontario it is largely under the department of education in these community programs. In Manitoba, to my knowledge, it seems largely to have been the responsibility of the University of Manitoba and the department of agriculture in that province. I therefore suggest to hon.
Proposed Adult Education Council members that this is an unfortunate situation. I think that no one would wish to see any lessening of initiative at the local level, or bureaucratization at the federal level. However, I think there is a need for direction. I think there is a need for some sense of purpose and co-ordination. I think this ad hoc organization is simply not sufficient for something as important as I believe this matter to be.
Then, of course, there are in existence other agencies. There are the local boards of education which are carrying on night school classes in most centres. University extension work is being carried on. We all know of the tremendous work that has been done by St. Xavier University. We all know of the correspondence courses that Queen's University carries on and also of the extension work of the University of Toronto, McMaster University and Western University. We also know of what has been done for adult education in the field of agriculture by the University of Saskatchewan and the Ontario Agricultural College. Of course, with regard to the other types of agencies, we know of the work done by the Y.M.C.A., the Y.W.C.A. and the Y.M.H.A. We also know of the work that is done by private organizations such as labour unions, chambers of commerce and home and school associations as well as by private industry. In many cases there is a tremendous amount of overlapping within a community. I refer to overlapping on the provincial and national scale. That is why I feel as I do that this is a problem of major proportions in this nation.
We have a great deal of dispersion of activity, energy and resources. We cannot afford this kind of dispersion in a country which has the limited resources we have for dealing with such a subject. This situation was very clear back in 1947 when the province of Manitoba decided to appoint a royal commission. I shied away from suggesting a royal commission in this resolution as I feel that possibly we are making a turn towards the use of councils rather than commissions. However, in the order in council establishing this royal commission we find the following statement which I think is applicable here on the national scene. The order in council goes on to say this:
And whereas representations have been made to the government of Manitoba that each of the aforesaid agencies-
-which have just been listed and I have already mentioned them-
-and organizations carries on its work in that part of the field of adult education chosen by it, and that some of such agencies and organizations

Proposed Adult Education Council in carrying on their work consult and co-operate with other agencies and organizations, whereas others do not;
And whereas under these conditions it is thought that in the whole field of adult education in Manitoba there may be overlapping and even conflict between the work carried on by the various adult education agencies and organizations, and there may be also some portions of the field inadequately covered or not covered at all;
And whereas before further expenditures are made in the whole field of adult education, it is in the government's opinion desirable, to examine and appraise the value of the work carried on by all of these agencies and organizations, and to ascertain the manner in which
(a)	overlapping and conflict can be avoided; and in which
(b)	the work now carried on in the whole field of adult education may be improved by adequate correlation of existing services, and by the provision of a proper coverage of those parts of the field, if any, in which adult education is not now being provided adequately or at all-
That is why I have used the words "research council" in this resolution. I think perhaps that will be its main function, namely to gather information and to discover where this overlapping is taking place and where these gaps happen to be. I have also suggested, in the final part of the resolution, that we need a permanent centre to discover all the techniques of adult education. The criticism is often made that in our educational system we treat children like young adults and that we treat adults like children. I think the tremendous advances in psychology and psychiatry put at our finger tips a tremendous amount of information which can be put to use in this area of adult education. So often I think we become discouraged by the fact that some unemployed persons do not seem to want retraining, do not want educational opportunities, and that we seemingly have to talk people into doing some of these things. I think some of the techniques which have been used in other areas could well be put to use in the area of adult education. We must find out more about the human mind. We must keep up with the advances in physical sciences. I believe that this is a matter of survival.
I think we need a permanent centre with qualified staff to carry out research projects, and to suggest activities which could be performed by various agencies. We know that the national film board does a monumental work. However, one wonders whether all the things which are produced by what I consider to be a magnificent department in our government are really efficiently utilized and also whether the work of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is fully appreciated by the people of the whole nation.
I am sure that other members of this house have reasons why adult education is important. May I suggest only three. This is not something new. It is rather interesting

to note that mechanics institutes were set up in the maritimes in 1830, only five years after they had been set up originally in the United Kingdom. Even as early as 1891 one can find what could be called a conference on adult education taking place at the behest of the then minister of education in Ontario. However, I feel that the matter is so much more important today. Unfortunately we have fallen behind in our concept of education. We tend to look upon education as something which is provided for the young and to think that once they have reached the age of 16, 18 or 21 it is a finished thing, that a finished product has been turned out and that education is of much less value or of much less relevancy to people who are older.
The first reason I put forward is that we live in a fast moving age. We know that the knowledge gained in any field, whether it is electronics or metallurgy, is almost irrelevant 20 years later. I think we must adjust our concept of education in order to meet conditions in this fast changing world. Last winter we saw that many of those who were unemployed were in that situation because they had no skill. In many cases they even had no basic education. I think this was a thing which became clearly apparent. I think of a rather interesting experience in my own constituency where the Canadian General Electric Company, which has been expanding its activities tremendously over the last few months, wanted skilled people. There were 1,000 or 2,000 people who had their names registered with the national employment service but the Canadian General Electric Company could not get people to fill the jobs available. They were obliged to go out and set up a training program, in co-operation with the municipal officials, in order to get the people with the required skill to fill the jobs that were sitting there open. I think this is a very acute problem. Mr. Arthur Piggott, the head of the Canadian association of adult education, suggested that last winter we had the worst trained working force in the world. The Minister of Labour indicated that we had been importing our skilled help over the last number of years. I think this is an area for a full scale effort in adult education. We may not have the kind of society where we end our education and then go to work but rather we will have a society where the pattern will be educate, work, educate, work, in order to keep people moving along and make them far more productive.
I feel that this is an area of extreme interest because I find that many young people cannot be motivated to accept education at its full value. They want to leave

school. I think that somehow we have to provide an opportunity tor them to return. After all, the loss of people's brains is in my view the greatest waste we can possibly have. According to an article in the Globe and Mail, only 6.2 per cent of our people are classified as professional workers while in the United States the figure is 18.6. Only 16.3 per cent of our workers are classified as skilled whereas in the United States the figure is 32.9. In this age of automation we are going to have to keep up. This council may find that $5 million for mental fitness is only a start when it comes to deal with this great problem.
The second reason I suggest is that we live in a dangerous age. Our survival depends on what men know and how they react to that knowledge. Ignorance is not bliss; it is annihilation. I think hon. members realize that we must be concerned about an aroused, misinformed and intolerant public opinion. I believe that adult education is necessary to keep people abreast of the problems of the world in which they live. I cite an example. We all know of the need to give aid to the undeveloped countries of the world. I remember hearing the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Green), who is perhaps one of the greatest exponents of aid, say to an audience, "If we give any more, your taxes will go up".
I think we in this chamber often realize that there are some things it is hard to sell to the electorate, and I suggest that adult education so that we may have an informed public is one of the greatest assets of the kind of government democracy that all of us I am sure desire. Some may say that what I am suggesting would be a blow to freedom. I do not think the sports council is going to be a blow to freedom. I do not believe anybody is going to be forced to play football or run on a track. In my opinion we live in an age of advertising and selling techniques and we must sell adult education. We must focus attention on it in the same way that advertising agencies are focussing attention on other areas of our society. This is the reason why I think we need a federal focus.


Mr. Speaker:: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member but his time has expired.


Mr. J. C. MacRae (York-Sunbury):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to compliment the hon. member who has introduced this resolution on the very fine dissertation he has given on this subject. A few years ago the slogan was used in education week that "education is everybody's business". I suppose the word "challenge" is more overworked than any other in this day and age,
Proposed Adult Education Council but it seems to me, the greatest challenge we have in our domestic life today is in the field of education, not only education of our children but the education of our adults, the education of all Canadians. There was an excellent article in the January 20 issue of the Toronto Telegram, an excellent paper, written by Mr. Frank Drea, a Telegram staff reporter. He said this in part:
Canada's biggest economic fight is no longer against unemployment or the threatened loss of once secure markets but the frantic race against time to retrain the most obsolete work force in the western world.
So it seems to me that the problem throughout Canada is to get more and more of our unemployed adults to take training of some kind or other. The resolution refers to vocational and technical training and as I am especially interested in that field I should like to discuss it for a few minutes. I realize that others would also like to speak on this matter.
There is an unfortunate tendency in the country today to believe that if the dominion and the provinces provide school rooms and teachers for vocational and technical training then, as if by magic, the problem of the unskilled man without work will be solved. Some adult unemployed, and I have talked to many of them, as we all have, quickly fall into a mood close to despair, feeling that the world no longer wants them because they lack education or skills in demand. It is not enough to tell them that additional training schools have been and will be provided. Sunk in insecurity, many of them have to be assured that they are fit for training, that they can learn new skills-that, in short, they can have another chance. They need encouragement to restore self-confidence.
Better times are now coming in sight but this will not eliminate unemployment. Unfortunately there is a hard core that will not be eliminated for the simple reason that their jobs no longer exist and will never exist again. Perhaps one of the most common examples is that of elevator operators. Automatic elevators have made operators unnecessary in new buildings. That is automation. It means displacement. It demands that the community take some responsibility for seeing that those displaced are equipped for employment in other fields.
But a fine building and good teachers will achieve nothing unless the unemployed appear to take classes. To make the elderly, the discouraged, the disgruntled or the impatient come to regard vocational classes as their best friends will not be easy. It is apt to be even a harder job than finding the money for schools and for the hiring of teachers.
656	HOUSE OF
Proposed Adult Education Council
Yes, Mr. Speaker, we know that a very large percentage of our unemployed have little or no education. In former years a man could get by without very much education and perhaps even without a trade; but that time is past. I know of the case of a man who as a boy of 14 began to work for Canadian National Railways as a rodman. When he retired he was superintendent of the Atlantic region of Canadian National Railways. That kind of thing is very rarely happening now.
A year or two ago one of the finest tasks that has been discharged by the Senate was carried out by the committee of that place on manpower and employment. They produced a great many figures showing the ratio between unemployment and education. They showed, for example, that unemployment rates were high among those who had not finished primary school, as a matter of fact, twice as high as among those who had not attended high school and six times higher than the rate for high school graduates.
A few weeks ago a man came to see me about employment. After chatting with him for a little while I said, "All right, I should like to try to help you find work. How much education do you have?" He said, "I hesitate to admit it but I have none; I am illiterate". My next question was, "Have you any trade?" He said, "No, I have no trade; I am a labourer." What can any of us do for men like that?
As the sponsor of the resolution has said, for a long time adult education was concerned mainly with forums and matters of that nature, but adult education will have to branch out. As a teacher, it seems to me that for far too long we have stressed, and perhaps rightly so up to this point, that education was for living but not necessarily for making a living. All of us have to make a living. Communism and the other isms thrive on empty stomachs. It seems to me we have made a great many mistakes with respect to education. In the time of Dickens it was felt that if a child was chastised enough he would learn. If he did not memorize the two or three pages of Latin assigned to him each evening then the procedure was to whale the dickens out of him, if I may use a pun.
Then, of course, the trend changed and it seems to me that in the last quarter or half century the trend went too far the other way. We were trying to entertain our youngsters in school and trying to make school so pleasant for them. Education is for living as well as making a living, as I have said, and living is work. We must work. It is not all entertainment. I think that the trend is somewhat the other way now. For many years


the trend was to build large schools with great gymnasiums and any youngster who lived more than two or three hundred yards from the school was taken there in a bus. Then, they must run the little fellow around in a gymnasium to give him enough exercise. We should be getting away from that, we must because we are in a very changing world.
The sponsor of the resolution said that education is a provincial matter. This is very true. Education is a provincial matter and it ought to remain a provincial matter. Although I am opposed to centralization, in many cases, it seems to me that this is one field in which we might enter more fully on a federal basis, to co-ordinate all those agencies that are working in this field. I must say that I feel our school year for the children of this country is too short. I see no reason why school should not be conducted for at least 44 weeks a year. I suppose I would not be very popular if I were to say that in a school auditorium. In connection with that aspect I might say that a day or two ago I saw a cartoon in which two youngsters were depicted sliding during a terrific winter storm. One youngster said to the other, isn't it wonderful that it was too cold today to go to school? This is another failure we have. We are making it too easy for the children.
I should like to compliment the government, the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) and his officials upon their approach to technical education. I have had some dealings within the last year or two with the vocational branch of the Department of Labour. I am sure there is no finer branch of any department in the country. In closing, I should like to say that no matter what we may do in the field of education we must never forget the teachers. The teacher we have at the front of the classroom in any school, vocational, technical or any other field of education, is the most important factor in the whole educational system.


Mr. H. M. Batten (Humber-St. George's):: I should like to take a few moments, Mr. Speaker, to make a few comments on this resolution. I should first like to commend the hon. member for Peterborough (Mr. Pitman) for introducing this resolution. I think it is a timely resolution and one that needs debating in a national forum of this type. He explained his purpose in introducing the resolution and went on to say that education in this country is the responsibility of the provinces. I would hope that any program looking toward adult education would also be provincial in its scope and would be under the departments of education of the different provinces.

Of course I must say at the same time there is a national aspect to education. It is because education does have a national aspect that I believe there are some things the federal government can offer to education in general, a service which can be given by the federal government better than it can be given by the government of any of the provinces. This is particularly true in the field of research. It is because of the use of the word "research" in this resolution which the hon. member has brought forward that I have so much interest in it.
I was interested in the remarks of the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. MacRae). In this particular field, of course, he speaks with a professional background and with many years of experience which would command wide respect for his opinion. I think he gave a very practical view of what this problem is. The other day when I was looking over this resolution and wondering what could be said, I looked back over one of the provincial reports of the department of education of Newfoundland for the year 1959. Dr. Florence O'Neil, the director of the division of adult education, in making her report to the provincial government of Newfoundland, began with these words:
One of the important and worth-while long range objectives of a progressive country is the development of well informed people.
I think that one sentence, Mr. Speaker, sums up the whole purpose, not only of adult education but of all education in the widest sense of the word. We in Canada live in a country that is becoming highly industrialized. We spend millions and millions of dollars every year to refine raw materials that are to be used in industry. We spend millions and millions of dollars to improve the methods to be used by industry. I see nothing wrong with spending money to refine the human resources of our country so that they can make a better contribution to the country during the period in which they live.
We live, of course, in an age of automation. We live at a time when there are many new jobs which were never heard of when I was a boy. I do not believe that, in the long run, automation is going to make less jobs for Canadians. I believe that in the long run it will make more jobs for Canadians, but these jobs will only be for those who are prepared to take them. I think that any scheme to improve education across this country, whether it be provincial or federal, should be in accordance with our needs and not at all in accordance with any scare that might be thrown at us by any nation outside the confines of our own borders. Over the
Proposed Adult Education Council last few years we have heard a great deal about the emphasis being placed on scientific education by the Russians.
There is no doubt about the fact that here in this country, indeed for many years to come and maybe for all time, there will be a great demand for people with scientific training. There are some people who, when they look at what is being done in other countries, feel we are not doing enough in the field of scientific education. I have said this before in this house but I should like to say it again now, that I believe we should develop a system of education that is suitable to our needs. I hope the day will never come when we are going to be stampeded into adopting some form of education just because that form is being followed in some other country. I feel that we in this country would be making a terrible mistake if we were to have our educational system loaded on the side of science without having an equal balance on the side of the social sciences and humanity.
However, I recognize the need for scientific training. As I said before, we are living in an age of automation when there are new kinds of jobs coming up every day, and when there are new types of training required if men are going to fill those jobs efficiently and well. When the hon. member for Peterborough gave his definition of adult education, he gave a very wide meaning to the words. I agree with that because, when we are talking about adult education we should be referring to something which is broad in its concept so that it will take in all the various organizations and various programs which provide knowledge and training, not only for young Canadians but Canadians of all ages. We do, of course, have our basic program of elementary high school education. This is followed by our program of university education. Obviously, for various reasons, not everybody is able to graduate from high school. Only a small percentage of our population can go to university, and a smaller percentage of those can graduate.
But whatever the reasons are for people not being able to complete high school or not being able to go to university, we will have to recognize the fact that if everybody went to high school and even if everybody were able to graduate from university, there would still be a need in the later years to acquire knowledge in some specific form. I might say that if we are to be able to handle the jobs and challenges which industry offers today, then there will be an ever increasing need for improving our knowledge and training.
I believe that over the years we have not had the kindest feelings towards adult

Proposed Adult Education Council education or vocational education. I believe it is a mild form of academic snobbery and it would profit us if we could get rid of it completely. Nature is going to provide for those who will profit from university work, and I believe nature will provide for those who are able to benefit by technical work. But whatever form of training appears desirable, whether it is academic, technical or vocational, I believe training is needed by different types of Canadians in whatever work they do and in whatever field they make a living.
In many countries there is an increasing need at the present time for adult education, and I believe there is a growing respect for it. I hope in this country we shall also be able to develop an increased respect for vocational and technical education.
Looking back over the years I remember some of the work done in the field of adult education in this country. I am thinking of the work done in the St. Francis Xavier University of Nova Scotia, and of the work done by David Smith in Ontario. One could also think of the youth training program initiated by the federal government in the late 30's, and of the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act of 1942, federal aid to universities in 1952 and, in more recent times, the increased moneys which have been paid to universities and the increased attention which has been given to vocational and technical training.
Each province has now some form of adult education. However, there are many organizations and I believe it would be a good thing if some body or institution would promote research and offer advice and assistance in the further development of adult education. I have not given this matter sufficient thought to decide whether or not there should be a separate body or whether it should be a body within the organization of the Canadian associations for adult education. I have not settled in my own mind what the proper place for such a body should be but, in general, I do agree with the idea put forward by the hon. member for Peterborough.


Mr. M. D. Morton (Davenport):: I believe this is a very important resolution as it brings before the house two important needs. One is the need of adult education itself, because it has been estimated that over seven million adult Canadians have never finished high school. In these days of changing patterns of jobs, many of us have noticed the difficulty of obtaining jobs for these people who have not had training. This pattern has created a crisis, but I do not say that adult education should primarily be


designed towards the obtaining of jobs. It is much broader than that, but this is one aspect which has created the present crisis.
It also points out the problem arising in Canada regarding the need for co-ordinating the various educational activities. The reason the federal government has had to play an increasing role in education is that education has changed and expanded. It is because, since the days of the B.N.A. Act, it has become so interwoven in our national affairs that it can no longer be considered as only a matter for the provinces. Basically, of course, under the constitution it is the responsibility of the provinces, and I would like to deal for a moment with the constitutional aspect because it is a problem in many parts of the country.
I think we still believe that education is basically the responsibility of the provinces. It was made so under section 93 of the British North America Act in order to protect the rights of minorities. At that time it was also felt that education could be better dealt with from a local level and that financing of education could be better cared for by taxing the land. But, if we look at education at that time and at the expanded meaning of education today, I think we can find the basis of a broader meaning of education without restricting it to being dealt with as a provincial matter.
At that time I would suggest the term education was based on teacher-pupil instruction but, because of the importance of education on a national basis, we have seen the development in which the federal government has had to bring about instruction in the field of agriculture and in technical and vocational training, and in our armed forces where we have provisions by which education is available to many of those who have taken training. We have also many departments within the federal government by which aid is being given to education. Therefore I would suggest that when we are looking at this from a legal point of view we would be wrong in saying that today we must accept the narrow interpretation of education which was applied to it in the days of confederation. I would suggest that the cases, if they were studied very carefully-and I have not the time this afternoon to develop that-would indicate that a broader definition of education would be accepted by our courts in order to validate all that has been done.
I know there is the extreme view that education is entirely a matter for the provinces, and that even money raised and spent on education by the federal government is provided unconstitutionally. However, I believe that is not the prevailing feeling today.

I would suggest that the word "education" cannot be restricted to the activities in schools, in the ordinary sense. It embraces much more, and all the authorities consider education to have a much wider meaning which would embrace every endeavour and matter relating to the acquisition and assimilation of knowledge that people, as well as civilization could undertake. In this sense one could include as part of education what is regarded as civilization. However, this very wide meaning I would suggest is not the meaning attributed to the word used in the B.N.A. Act. If we were to use this as the basis of our thinking it would give ample justification to the continuing involvement of the federal government in the field of education and at the same time it would not interfere with those fundamental rights of the provinces.
I suggest that perhaps some people are too sensitive about those rights, but they are overlooking the great national need when they try to make education a purely provincial matter. I appeal to all those who are interested in the advancement of this country to seek to co-operate and see to it that education is not a matter of one jurisdiction or another but is a matter of co-operation in such a way that the fundamental rights within the provinces are not affected. Therefore I suggest that the resolution brought forward has fair, legal justification.
I should also like to point out that there is a danger if we do not at some time take steps to set up either this or some other vehicle whereby there is co-operation between the provinces and the dominion in respect of education. At the present time under the system of assistance to vocational and technical training we set up certain conditions under which the provinces may receive grants in respect of training. The emphasis is on training. I think there is a danger of the provinces setting up institutions purely and simply to become qualified to receive federal grants and perhaps have within their province two systems of education, one in training and the other in general education. That is a danger that has been expressed in various parts of the country. This is a danger that could be increased if the federal grants are given on certain conditions which do not particularly meet provincial requirements.
I suggest therefore that if we do not have a body set up as is described in this resolution, perhaps the time has come-and I say this with some trepidation that I might be misunderstood in certain sections of this country-when within the federal set up there should be a department within one of our present departments co-ordinating all the educational grants and assistance we are now
Proposed Adult Education Council giving to the provinces. That department would be able to work in co-operation as an arbitrator, not an arbitrator in the sense of deciding what should be done but in bringing together the various provincial groups and trying to learn from them what we can do best without interfering with their local autonomy.
The manifestations of that need are shown clearly in organizations such as C.E.A., which has been operating for many years on the basis that all the educational authorities of the provinces get together and discuss the educational problems of the nation. It places no responsibility as to the decisions to be made but acts purely in a co-operative capacity. The Canadian conference of education is another manifestation of this need. These purposes could be fulfilled in an official capacity under one of the departments of the government and without interfering with the local autonomy of the provinces.
I hope that measures such as this will point up that need and bring about a much needed reorganization, a much needed reassessment of our attitudes toward education in this country, because we cannot grow as a nation if we remain provincially minded; we must think in terms of a Canadian nation. We talk of our material resources. We must also talk in terms of our human resources, and these human resources should not be limited because of narrow-bound, provincial attitudes toward education.
I think there is perhaps a fundamental right involved here when persons and families want to get the best education possible. These rights, these desires should not be hindered because of narrow provincialism. The best can be obtained by the co-operation of all people interested in education.


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


Murray Douglas Morton: Yes.


Leon David Crestohl: Are we to understand from the hon. member's observations that he is recommending federal control of provincial institutions in the way they spend their money on education?


Murray Douglas Morton: If the hon. member had been listening he would know that not only did I not say that but I carefully pointed out that we would not interfere with the local autonomy of the provinces, that it is a matter of co-operation. I think that the type of question the hon. member has asked is a hindrance to education in this country. The time has come when we had better grow up and stop making politics a basis for our decisions in education. It is people like that who prevent progress in education; they think only in terms

Royal Assent
of petty provincial politics. We realize that education can be best administered from the local level, as I said earlier in my speech. I know the hon. member is only trying to misinterpret what I said for the benefit of the people in his province.


Mr. Kindt:: He just came in.


Murray Douglas Morton: Well, no wonder he did not understand. I do appeal for a greater sense of unity in Canada and, no matter whether it be in regard to adult education or grants to universities, that we think in terms of what we can best do for the future generations of Canada. Let us stop thinking in terms of votes in our various constituencies.


Mr. Deschaieleis:: That is always the point of view from your side.


Mr.   Morion@: No, it is not always the point of view. I have sat here and seen how people have tried to turn good things into bad in order that they can interpret them for their own purposes and obtain votes in1 their constituencies. This is one matter that has been played down through the ages by petty politicians trying to turn people against having a good, co-operative basis for education across this country.
Again I appeal to those who think in terms of a good Canadian culture which takes in the rights of the various provinces across this country, because that is part of Canadian culture, that is part of building a nation, in bringing into the educational system all that is best within the provinces of this country.



THE ROYAL ASSENT

[Stage Direction]
A message was delivered by Major C. R. Lamoureux, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, the Honourable the Deputy Governor General desires the immediate attendance of this honourable house in the chamber of the honourable the Senate.
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker with the house went up to the Senate chamber.
And being returned:
Mr. Speaker informed the house that the Deputy Governor General had been pleased to give, in Her Majesty's name, the royal assent to the following bill:
An act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service for the financial year ending the 31st March, 1962.

Mr. Denis:: Mr. Speaker, would the house leader outline the business of the house before dissolution-or rather, before tomorrow.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, I regret that hon. gentlemen opposite are so nervous.


Azellus Denis: So willing.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The first item tomorrow will be the resolution in the name of the Minister of National Health and Welfare dealing with the Disabled Persons Act. The second item will be second reading of the bill to amend the Old Age Assistance Act. Third will be second reading of the bill to amend the Blind Persons Act. Fourth will be the resolution standing in my name dealing with an amendment to the Civilian War Pensions and Allowances Act. Fifth will be the resolution also standing in my name to amend the Children of War Dead (Education Assistance) Act. The sixth item will be second reading of Bill No. C-36, to amend the War Service Grants Act. Seventh will be second reading of Bill No. C-37, to amend the Veterans Insurance Act.
For good measure, the eighth item will be the resolution standing in the name of the Minister of Transport dealing with a proposed railway line at Whitecourt, Alberta, and the ninth item will be second reading of Bill No. C-48, an act respecting the construction of a line of railway from Optic lake to Chisel lake, Manitoba.


Azellus Denis: Have you forgotten about the speech from the throne?


[Stage Direction]
It being fifteen minutes after six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, February 8, 1962