1962-02-23

THE ROYAL ASSENT

['By leave of the house may I table for the information of hon. members copies in English and French of a document known as the declaration of Paris, which is the report of the delegates to the Atlantic convention of NATO nations which met in Paris from January 8 to January 20, 1962.']
Mr. Speaker:: 

Mr. Speaker:: By leave of the house may I table for the information of hon. members copies in English and French of a document known as the declaration of Paris, which is the report of the delegates to the Atlantic convention of NATO nations which met in Paris from January 8 to January 20, 1962.



REPORTED RESENTMENT OVER EXPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition):: I should like to ask the Acting Minister of Trade and Commerce whether he has any comment to make on a report which appeared in the press this morning to the effect that the Japanese authorities are becoming embittered by the efforts of the federal government to keep a tight lid on exports from their country to Canada, despite a continuing sharp increase in Canadian sales to Japan.


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Acting Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I have not seen the report in question. I doubt very much if it is expressed in accurate terms because, as the Minister of Finance has explained on so many
occasions, the arrangements with Japan are on co-operative basis. However, I will draw this question to the attention of the Minister of Trade and Commerce.



MEETING OF AMBASSADORS RESPECTING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Yesterday the hon. member for Richelieu-Vercheres (Mr. Cardin), asked me if I would inform the house whether the Canadian ambassador to Cuba and other ambassadors of the NATO countries were convoked by the Cuban authorities in Havana concerning the United States embargo on Cuba.
The Canadian ambassador was asked to call on the foreign minister of Cuba earlier this week to discuss trade relations between Canada and Cuba. My understanding is that ambassadors of other NATO countries also engaged in similar discussions with the Cuban authorities. The representations made by the Cuban government have been noted but, as is known to most hon. members, comment is not made on the substance of discussions forming part of normal diplomatic exchanges with another government.



EUROPEAN COMMON MARKET


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Arnold Peters (Timiskaming):: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Trade and Commerce. In view of a report in today's Globe and Mail that the common market representatives appeared not to favour granting Britain's request to increase the traditional period allowed for the adaptation of Britain's agriculture to the trade alliance common policy, and in view of the obvious implications for Canada's large agricultural exports, would the minister state whether he will now ask for permission for a Canadian observer to sit in on the Brussels negotiations when Canadian problems are discussed?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, there are Canadian observers over in Europe at the present time dealing with that subject and related ones.

Inquiries of the Ministry



NEGOTIATIONS RESPECTING QUOTA ON PLYWOOD

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. George C. Nowlan (Acting Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Laurier asked me, as Acting Minister of Finance, a question with respect to discussions which might be going on between representatives of the Japanese government and the Canadian government concerning imports of plywood into Canada. As the house will know, the Japanese government has imposed restrictive quotas on exports of plywood to Canada for several years. At the present time consultations are going on between representatives of the two governments with respect to the quota that will be imposed or acted upon during the present year.



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: wish to address a question to the Postmaster General. In view of a report from the federal office of the New Democratic party that it is continually receiving mail addressed to the national Liberal federation, would the Postmaster General ensure that his officials are made aware that the national Liberal federation enjoys a separate existence and address, and that there is not the slightest chance of it being received into communion with the New Democratic party?


Hon. W. M. Hamilton (Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, we probably have within the confines of the department some people who are aware of the political facts of life in this country, and who feel there is so little difference between the two groups that it does not matter where their mail goes. However, I appreciate the desire of some people in this house to preserve the existing fiction. We certainly should deliver mail in the way in which it is addressed, and will be glad to see that this is done.



BIRTHDAY GREETINGS TO MINISTER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Azellus Denis (St. Denis):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a question to the Postmaster General, but before doing so I wish to say that today is not the day of Mr. Day, the United States postmaster general. Today is our own Postmaster General's day, his birthday. X number of years ago the Postmaster


General was born. Unfortunately I have no picture of him as a baby. I suppose at that time he was not in a position to look after his publicity. However, he has certainly arranged to organize it since that time. I am sure to meet with general approval in wishing the Postmaster General the happiest birthday ever.
I have another wish to convey to him. The work of the present Postmaster General is very burdensome, involving as it does extensive travelling, scooter driving, pen nib changing, and so forth. For his own good I wish him a long, healthy and happy retirement away from politics after the next election.
My question is this. Has the Postmaster General any report to make about the discussions he held with the United States postmaster general?


William McLean Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to the hon. member for his expression of good wishes, which I appreciate very much indeed. I presume my very existence proves that there is something that sometimes comes from playing post office.
The postmaster general of the United States, Mr. J. Edward Day, and I had a most successful meeting earlier this week. There was an exchange of ideas, and I believe some constructive suggestions emerged. Several of the projects now under way in Canada which we were able to show him seemed to create interest, and the possibility may be explored of their being adapted for use in the United States. We also obtained from our friends in the United States some helpful suggestions which may have application here. I do not think it is necessary to go beyond that at this time.



CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, yesterday as reported at page 1129 of Hansard the hon. member for Kootenay West asked the following question:
In view of the recent decision of the board of transport commissioners to remove the agent from the station at Rossland, a city of over 4,000 population, and in view of the strong protests by the city council, the chamber of commerce and the population of that city, would an appeal to the governor in council against this decision receive consideration?
The governor in council is always prepared to consider any reasonable appeal against

an order or decision of the board of transport commissioners. However, in considering appeals to the governor in council from orders of the board there has been a long standing practice not to disturb such orders unless it is clearly evident that the board has acted upon some wrong principle or has otherwise erred. Where the matters at issue are questions of fact, such as in the Rossland case, and are questions that the board is qualified to determine and which it has determined after holding hearings, it has been customary not to interfere with the findings of the board which has been constituted a court of record for the determination of such questions of fact.
In the Rossland case a district inspector of the board was sent to Rossland to investigate. A public meeting was held there on November 2, 1961, and interested parties were heard. It was shown that the Canadian Pacific Railway had established a merchandising service depot at Tadanac, about six miles from Rossland, in June, 1961, with pick-up and delivery trucking services to Rossland and that, in consequence, practically all traffic is now being handled by truck with delivery in most cases direct to the consignees. Carload traffic outward from Rossland was nil in the last reported year, and incoming carload traffic averaged about 12 cars monthly in that period.
The board considered that in view of the reduced traffic since the establishment of the merchandising services, the burden to the company of maintaining the agency outweighed the modest public loss and inconvenience resulting from closing the agency. The board therefore ordered the closing of the agency.



CIVIL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. W. Monieilh (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: In my reply to the hon. member for Trinity yesterday, as found at page 1131 of Hansard, I am reported as having said:
*-while there is no specific date set, Arnprior probably will be closing at some time in the future.
What I intended to say was:
-Arnprior probably will be discontinuing these particular courses at some time in the future.
Upon inquiry I find that September 1 is the anticipated date.



CROP INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. As
Inquiries of the Ministry an encouragement to the provinces to make greater use of the Crop Insurance Act, can the Prime Minister say whether consultations have been held between officials of the federal Department of Agriculture and the provincial departments of agriculture to discuss the question of reinsurance of losses under the Crop Insurance Act?


John George Diefenbaker: As the hon. member realizes, Mr. Speaker, a question like that could not be answered without notice. There have been no consultations with me. However, I will look into the purport of the question.


Hazen Robert Argue: 1 just wish to say to the Prime Minister that I sent the question to his office about 20 minutes before 11 o'clock.


John George Diefenbaker: It probably got lost. (Translation):



AIRPORTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. P. Deschatelets (Maisonneuve-Rose-moni):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of Transport.
Did the minister have discussions recently with representatives of the Montreal taxicab associations which are trying to get a partial concession at Dorval airport instead of the service given exclusively by Murray Hill Taxi Limited at present? Has the minister any comments to make following those discussions?


Hon. Leon Balcer (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, in the last year I had many discussions with representatives of several taxi companies of Montreal and Dorval which wanted to obtain a permit for the conveyance of passengers from Dorval airport to the city of Montreal. Those various requests have been taken into consideration; I have no other comment to make in this respect.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Does the minister not feel that this exclusive charter granted to Murray Hill Limousine Service Limited amounts to undue patronage on the part of the government?


Léon Balcer: This exclusive concession was granted initially to Murray Hill Limousine Service Limited by our predecessor. If he thinks this is undue patronage, the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont will only have to blame my predecessor, the hon. member for Laurier.

Inquiries of the Ministry
(Text) [DOT]



PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. R. Tucker (Trinity-Conception):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works but in his absence I will direct it to his parliamentary assistant. If the minister is here I will direct it to him. Is the minister aware that 14 passengers, including two members of parliament, were trapped in elevator No. 3 last evening for 25 minutes, and will precautions be taken to see that this does not happen again?


Hon. D. J. Walker (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member this had nothing to do with the vote.


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Trinity):: Mr. Speaker, while the Minister of Public Works is being so genial, perhaps he might see if he can correct the time shown by the clocks in the hall just as one comes in the front door.



TELEVISION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Clyde Nowlan: Mr. Speaker, the other day the hon. member for Bonavista-Twil-lingate asked me a question with respect to a program of station CJCH-TV, and whether it involved a breach of the regulations of the board of broadcast governors. The short answer to that question is no, but I think in view of the circumstances a word of explanation is perhaps advisable.
CJCH-TV put on a program some time in November called "Youth Wants to Know" in which 25 students from four Nova Scotia universities interviewed the premier of Nova Scotia on questions of public interest. Later on the Progressive Conservative association of Nova Scotia asked CJCH if it could put on such a program under the auspices of the party. The manager of CJCH telephoned the board of broadcast governors and asked if this could be done without attributing political sponsorship thereto, and in view of the fact that the 25 students were selected by the universities and not by any political party the first answer given was that it would not be necessary for it to be attributed to political auspices.
The program was put on and of course the premier, as usual, did so well that it was felt desirable to keep repeating the program. Since this will become at least for the next three or four months a matter of regular


programming, it has been decided after consultation between the board and CJCH that in future all broadcasts should be given the political designation of being under the auspices of the Progressive Conservative association of Nova Scotia.


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Bonavista-Twillin-gaie):: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I might be permitted to ask the minister a supplementary question arising out of the answer he has given. Can the minister say whether the original program was a public service program or a paid program?


George Clyde Nowlan: I take it that the hon. member is referring to the first program in November. I understand that was a public service program put on as a public service by the station.



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries, Mr. Speaker, and I apologize for not giving him notice. He may wish to take this question as notice and answer later. Has the minister's department received any report of the damage to fishermen's property and equipment as the result of the storm which was very severe around the Burin peninsula two days ago? If there are no reports, would the minister initiate some inquiry to determine the extent of the damage?


Hon. J. A. MacLean (Minister of Fisheries):: I am quite sure no report has been received, at least none has reached my desk as yet. I will look into the question.


John Whitney Pickersgill: May I ask a supplementary question. When the minister does receive this report, if the damage is of such a nature that it appears beyond the capacity of the local authorities to handle, in view of the federal government's jurisdiction over fisheries, would the government give consideration to making an addition to the aid already provided?


John Angus MacLean: I will look into the question, Mr. Speaker.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Earlier this session, Mr. Speaker, I asked the Minister of Fisheries about the possibility of introducing

Canadian National Railways
legislation based upon the report of Dr. Sinclair relating to licence limitations. As I recall, the minister answered at that time to the effect it would depend on the length of the session. I wonder if I could ask the minister now if he has a better appreciation of the length of the session, and whether we can expect such legislation.
Hon, J. A. MacLean (Minister of Fisheries):
The whole problem is still under consideration. I should like to point out that I believe any change could be made by regulation and would not require legislation. However, I am not absolutely certain, and it might depend on what the changes were.



CHANGE IN ORDER OF BUSINESS FOR TODAY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Minto Churchill: Before the orders of the day are called, Mr. Speaker, may I draw the attention of the house to an addition. We have called first for consideration an amendment suggested by the Senate to Bill No. C-63. I should like to follow that with second reading of Bill No. C-67-and this course is suggested as the result of consultation and agreement of the parties opposite-without further debate. This bill would then go to the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines. If further debate on the bill is required, that will be possible when the bill comes back to the house for the committee stage.
Then our next item of business would be supplementary estimates, and in order to accommodate various people the order in which they will be called is as follows: agriculture, defence production, finance, forestry, labour, mines and technical surveys, national research, northern affairs, citizenship and immigration, public works, etc. In the absence of one or two of our ministers on official business, I will endeavour to supply the house with the information that is wanted on specific items that are called in the sup-plementaries. If on the other hand they require more information than is available to me or my colleagues, we would have to defer some of these items until the ministers have returned.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, if I may say a word in appreciation of the statement just made by the house leader, we have sought in consultation to arrive at a mutual accommodation because of some difficulties on both sides of the house. I appreciate very much what the house leader is doing in this matter, and I would say that as far as we are concerned, if the government wish to have any item
deferred to meet their convenience I am sure there will be no difficulty on this side of the house. It may be that in the case of one of two of the items we may make a similar request, and I would hope it would meet with the same type of response.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. John R. Matheson (Leeds):: May I
repeat a question I addressed to the Prime Minister on January 19. Will the Prime Minister advise the house whether a request has been received from farm representatives for a consumer butter subsidy? If so, would the Prime Minister indicate whether any action is intended by the government to meet the problem of this record butter surplus?


John George Diefenbaker: I mentioned at the time, as I recall it, that the matter was under consideration and that is the position of affairs today. On the return of the Minister of Agriculture it will receive attention.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


Léon Balcer: the second reading of and concurrence in an amendment made by the Senate to Bill No. C-63, respecting the construction of a line of railway in the province of Alberta by Canadian National Railway Company from Whitecourt, Alberta, in a westerly direction for a distance of approximately 23.2 miles to the property of Pan American Petroleum Corporation.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, amendment read the second time and concurred in.


Léon Balcer: the second reading of Bill No. C-67, to authorize the construction and operation on behalf of Her Majesty of a line of railway in the province of Quebec between Matane and Ste. Anne des Monts.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I just wish to say one word in connection with this bill. In the absence of my hon. friend from Laurier I feel I should say this. We feel that before there is further debate on this bill it would

Supply-Agriculture
be desirable to have the information that could be elicited in the committee. Therefore we are in complete accord with the position taken by the minister.


Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make one request. We are agreeable to having this bill go to the committee. I would only ask that it not come before the committee next Tuesday morning, because other business will keep two members of our party away from the house that morning.


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, we are quite agreeable to that, but I was wondering whether my hon. friend would agree to Tuesday afternoon.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I must inform the house that if the minister speaks now he will close the debate.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Léon Balcer: I should like to repeat that we are agreeable to not sitting on Tuesday morning, but we were planning on sitting Tuesday afternoon.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Speaker, I would-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: I believe the hon. member is asking the minister a question.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I would ask the minister whether he is aware that another transportation problem is going to take the hon. member for Port Arthur to Montreal, and whether he would consider this in fixing a particular day.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on railways, canals, and telegraph lines.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Martineau in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
Production and marketing branch-
615. Contributions to Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the governor in council of one half of the amounts paid by the governments of those provinces to farmers in respect of harvesting and baling of cereal crops for fodder to a maximum of $2.50 per ton, $190,000.
John Angus MacLean: Mr. Chairman, my colleague the Minister of Agriculture would like me to explain on his behalf that of course it is impossible for him to appear before the committee on this occasion because of illness. I should also like to add that as it happens it is also impossible for either of his parliamentary secretaries to be here. The hon.

member for Provencher is in hospital at the moment, but I understand he has not a serious condition, and the hon. member for Brant-Haldimand is absent because of the death of a near relative. However, I will endeavour to give the committee any information it desires on the items under the Department of Agriculture.
I should like to give a word of explanation with regard to vote No. 615, which we are considering at the present time. This vote covers the $190,000 required to reimburse the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba for one half of the amounts expended by them under emergency fodder bank programs instituted during the drought last summer. It will be recalled that on August 30, 1958 the Prime Minister advised the house of the government's intention to consider assisting provinces in the establishment of forage bank programs under which farmers would receive certain incentives to put up forage as a reserve against an emergency situation.
During July, 1961 an offer was made by the government to the three prairie provinces to pay half of a bonus of $5 per ton to farmers making cereal fodder available to fodder banks. The purpose was to encourage farmers to salvage as fodder, cereal crops which would not likely produce economic yields as grain. Each of the three prairie provinces established a fodder bank program on a municipality basis. Farmers consigning cereal fodder surplus to their requirements to a municipal fodder bank were eligible to receive a $5 per ton bonus.
The volume handled under the program was approximately as follows: Manitoba, 7,600 tons; Saskatchewan, 65,200 tons and Alberta, 2,000 tons. This vote will cover Canada's share of the program, which is $2.50 per ton.
(Translation):


Mr. Boulanger:: Mr. Chairman, we are
thankful to the minister for those explanations he gave the committee to warrant his estimates. However, we should like to have some more details. To begin with, I might say that his estimates to assist the western farmers who suffered a loss of millions of dollars during the 1961 season are fully justified.
According to the report issued by the Department of Agriculture, Saskatchewan farmers were particularly affected as their lost crops were valued at $200 million while the loss totalled $10 million in Alberta and $50 million in Manitoba.
I note that for the year 1959, according to the public accounts of March 31, 1961, the government had already paid out to Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the

governor in council, one half of the amounts paid by the provinces to the farmers in respect of the 1959 crops to a maximum of $300 per farm. Subsidies for administrative charges were also paid to the provinces and municipalities.
During 1961, the government paid an amount of $1,437,944.
I should like to ask the minister what amounts were paid in that respect since April 1 last year until now.
There is also another item concerning the transportation of fodder (straw and litter) and the movement of feed cattle from September 12 to April 30, 1960. The government appropriated $228,617 under that item. I should also like to ask the minister what amount has been paid until now for the fiscal year 1961-62?
(Text):


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: As the minister knows, we are particularly interested in prairie agriculture; I think that is the right term. We want to make certain that these farmers are getting all the assistance which can be provided, and we want to know just how this estimate is to be spent.
In addition to his statement, which was informative, would the minister give us some further information showing just how this vote is applied? I should like to know what organization is used to make certain of the needs of farmers in one place and the payment of this subsidy to farmers in other places; whether there is co-operation among the federal and provincial departments of agriculture and the municipalities, and so on. We should like the minister to give us as complete an explanation as he can in this connection.


John Angus MacLean: With regard to this fodder program it is, in the first instance, carried out by the municipalities concerned, municipalities which in the interests of the farmers in their own areas have taken advantage of this program which is subsidized by the provinces and the federal government to a total of $5 a ton for the making of fodder out of cereal crops which did not hold much prospect of producing an economic amount of cereal grain. This is, of course, a great advantage to the farmers in the various areas because it allows them to keep their cattle rather than market them at an unseasonable time; it forestalls the possibility of a glut of cattle going on the market as a result of the drought which occurred last summer.


Hazen Robert Argue: This has been a very worth while program. As has been pointed out,
Supply-Agriculture
it was inaugurated to meet an emergency situation, and I should like the minister to give us a breakdown of the amounts spent under this item so that we might have an indication of the use which has been made of this provision in particular provinces.
The minister has mentioned one good reason, one pertinent reason, why this program has been of value. He has told the committee it increases fodder supplies so that livestock producers are subject to less pressure to place their products on the market at once, with the disastrous effect on cattle prices that such an action would have. But this program has been a good one for another reason. It has been an encouragement to livestock producers to go out and salvage some fodder from a crop which would probably yield little or no grain. In addition to helping to keep cattle off the market it has helped to salvage a crop which would otherwise have produced little or nothing, and which could not have been salvaged without this program.
I should like to ask a question which I admit immediately is probably out of order, though it has a direct connection with this problem. I hope the minister can relay it to his colleagues in the cabinet. A great many farmers who needed fodder have done a tremendous job in getting fodder wherever it may have been available. I think one of the amazing things about this whole drought situation is the tremendous amount of fodder that farmers and livestock producers have been able to salvage. However, some producers- and I am thinking particularly of farmers living near the border-have found that the best way to meet the shortage has been to import fodder. Fodder coming into this country is subjected to a tariff levy. I do not have the precise amount in mind; it is not a large levy, though I think it is in excess of $1 a ton; I may be mistaken. I would think, however, that in a time of emergency it is not in keeping with other aspects of government policy that this penalty should be levied against producers who bring in fodder from the United States.
1 know this matter has been raised with the Minister of Agriculture. I know it has been brought to his attention by correspondence. We are all sorry that the hon. gentleman has been ill for so long, and we hope that he is back in parliament at an early date. However, I trust the acting minister will take note of my remarks and discuss this problem with him. The attitude of the government has been very helpful, and the suggestion I have made would round out what has been a worth while policy.


William Arnold Peters: I was wondering whether the minister could tell us the amount of money

Supply-Agriculture
that a farmer receives under this program on an average, on a acreage basis, if he takes advantage of this program under which the provincial and federal governments will each pay $2.50 per ton in respect of his fodder. In northern Ontario we were very interested last year both in this scheme and in the operation the government was carrying out in connection with food banks, especially in view of the fact that in northern Ontario we had a large amount of hay which was not going to be used this year. I suggested to the Department of Agriculture that this hay could be assembled at a reasonable price and the government could provide a subsidy for shipments of hay moving between eastern and western Canada or from the northern areas of the prairie provinces to parts of the country where transportation costs are prohibitive. I do not think we should have to bring in hay and fodder from the United States.


Hazen Robert Argue: That was not my suggestion at all.


William Arnold Peters: I did not say it was anyone's suggestion. In view of our transportation facilities and the control we exercise over them it should be possible to limit the disastrous effects of drought in western Canada.
Through the exercise of various controls it was possible to prevent a widespread throwing on the market of hay and fodder. The suggestion has been made in my area that in times of drought cattle could be moved to northern Canada for government supervised pasturing and wintering on a basis similar to that applicable in community pastures. I think this would be a step in the right direction. Natural disasters occur in all segments of the agricultural industry from time to time. There are sources of hay and fodder in northern Canada, and those areas happen to be on the way to the markets to which cattle is usually sent. Much of the cattle from western Canada moves into the Toronto and Montreal markets. I advance this suggestion for consideration.
Will the minister tell us whether the sums involved in this item represent a contribution to alleviate conditions produced by drought last year, or is this a regular fodder program for western Canada? I also wish to know how the federal government arrived at this sum of money. Does the federal government contribute at the request of the provincial government? To what extent does the federal government control or participate in the distribution of the fodder once it is in the fodder bank? Is its distribution supervised, and has the government any say as to who receives the product? Probably some advantage would flow from an interprovincial exchange of the assembled product. Does the

administration of the program by the federal government make this possible?


John Angus MacLean: Mr. Chairman, the administration of this program is entirely on a provincial and municipal basis. This is merely a subsidization of the provincial governments for what they have done in this program.
This brings me to a question asked by the hon. member for Assiniboia as to how much applied to which province. The figures are as follows: Manitoba, 7,600 tons amounting to $19,000; Saskatchewan, 65,200 tons amounting to $163,000; Alberta, 2,000 tons amounting to $5,000, for a total of $187,000. The item is actually for $190,000, but that is about as close as we can safely come to an estimate.
I am grateful to the hon. member for Assiniboia for his suggestion regarding import duty. Consideration was given to the importing of feed and hay duty free, but the implications in several provinces were such that it was considered best to try to overcome this problem by further assistance in the affected areas.
I was asked about the program of assistance for Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. In accordance with the terms and conditions prescribed by the Minister of Agriculture the federal government pays one half the amount paid by those provinces in respect of the transport of fodder and feed in the period of this fiscal year. That is covered by another item of $1.5 million which was passed in supplementary estimates No. 1 of the current year.


Hazen Robert Argue: I thank the minister for his reply. I am very disappointed that the minister has not been able to say that in this time of crop failure emergency farmers living along the United States boundary are allowed to go what is often just a few miles across the border and supplement their supplies by bringing in feed from the United States duty free. It is obvious to the minister that if you live in the centre of a province you can travel 30 miles in any direction and stay within the province, but if you live within five or six miles of the United States border and there is feed available in the United States, that is the handiest source.
I think it is a bad practice for the government not to allow farmers living along the border to bring in supplies from the United States in times of emergency without paying tariff. I can tell the minister that farmers living along the border feel they should be allowed to do so, not as a long term policy but in an emergency. They appreciate the action taken by the government with respect to general trucking costs and the assistance provided through this item, and so on, but

I share with them the feeling that it is ridiculous to deny them the opportunity of bringing in supplies from the United States, the most economical source, duty free. Those who are acquainted with the situation along the border feel, as I do, that the farmers there have a legitimate claim for repayment of the duty they have already paid.
I think the government should have another look at this question. I believe the farmers have a legitimate claim to be reimbursed the amount of the duty. They did not go across to the United States to buy fodder because they wanted to go there or because they preferred to go there. They went over there only because of crop failure the previous year.


Mr. McIntosh:: Why was it cut off in the first place? Because the farmers wanted it.


Hazen Robert Argue: If my hon. friend wishes to object to what I am saying, that is fine. The farmers who live in his part of Saskatchewan will know that he has objected to what I am saying. However, I am saying that the producers who live along the United States boundary feel that this is the rankest kind of discrimination in what could be an emergency year. I think the minister should check with his colleagues and persuade them, if he can, to reimburse these farmers for the duty which has been paid and which is a great hardship and a tax that should not be levied in that emergency situation. How does it make any sense at all to say that we will put an item in the estimates in order to help them overcome a difficult situation, but that for those who live along the boundary we will maintain a tax in order to make it more difficult for them to meet this emergency situation.


John Angus MacLean: I perhaps left the wrong impression with my friend the hon. member for Assiniboia. I did not mean to say that I think anything in this world is final and irrevocable for all time. I was explaining what the situation is at the present time and the problems of adjusting duties which are, as he knows, applied to the country as a whole. There are difficulties, but this is not to say that I will not see that another look is taken at this matter in order to ascertain whether some adjustment might be possible.


Hazen Robert Argue: If I may I should like to say one further word. Perhaps the best action would have not been to remove the tariff. I do not know about that matter; I am not an administrator. Perhaps the way to handle it is to reimburse the people who have paid the tariff if they submit a claim. But whether
Supply-Agriculture
it is handled in one way or another, I submit that it is gross discrimination against the farmers who live along the boundary for them to be charged a duty when they are going a few miles from home in order to supplement greatly needed fodder reserves. I think it is contrary to the government's policy in other ways. I think it is contrary to the government's natural desire to prevent a glut of cattle on the market. In order to be consistent, I think the government should follow the suggestion I have made, even though some other members may not agree with what I have said.


Mr. Habel:: I should like to ask the minister this question. Can he inform me whether the government of the province of Ontario made a request for assistance to the farmers of northern Ontario who, owing to very bad weather last season, had a poor crop of hay and grain? Was any request made by the government of Ontario to have assistance given jointly with the federal government?


John Angus MacLean: I believe not. I am not aware of any, in any case.
(Translation):


Samuel Boulanger: Mr. Chairman, I am glad the minister has agreed to examine the proposal which has just been made by the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) concerning the abolition of customs duties on animal feed imported from the United States.
Farmers in eastern Canada also have a problem with respect to the importation of certain feed grains, especially com, oats and barley. Consequently, I would ask the minister-


The Chairman:: Order. I have the impression that the hon. member is straying too far afield. I would ask him to limit his remarks to the item under consideration.


Samuel Boulanger: Mr. Chairman, we are now speaking of subsidies in respect of the crop and the baling of feed cereals, and I think that, with regard to the feeding of animals, grain is also a food. As the minister answered the hon. member for Assiniboia-


Paul Raymond Martineau: If I have rightly understood the hon. member, he was just about to deal with an entirely new matter. Therefore, I ask him to limit his remarks to the vote mentioned in supplementary estimates No. 3. As a matter

Supply-Agriculture
of fact, the subject matter of this debate should not be extended so as to become a general discussion on agricultural problems. I therefore ask the hon. member to comply with standing orders, which are very clear.


Samuel Boulanger: Mr. Chairman, I would simply ask the authorities of the Department of Agriculture to check whether or not customs tariffs on cereals might be eliminated for imports from the United States intended for western farmers. On the other hand, if this suggestion is considered, I fail to understand why we should not analyse the possibility of doing the same for the eastern farmers in this country.
We should not forget that our eastern farmers are also liable to crop damage. Indeed, last year, as the hon. member for Cochrane (Mr. Habel) just said, farmers in northern Ontario lost part of their crop, and if I remember correctly, the Ontario farmers association asked the federal government for assistance. I even think that a newspaper in northern Ontario-and I would like to be corrected if I am not right-published an item which stated that the federal government had not acceded to the request for assistance made by the northern Ontario farmers.
I reiterate my request to the effect that the Department of Agriculture examine the possibility of abolishing customs tariffs on imported cereals intended for eastern farmers.
(Text):


William Arnold Peters: I am certainly not happy with the remarks that have been made here, particularly by the last two speakers. We have a surplus of hay in northern Ontario, and we are not asking for any relief. We do not want any relief. However, my farmers of northern Ontario are paying this subsidy to western Canada. I think we have the right to ask the government to keep this money in Canada, at least, and not to go along with this proposal that the stuff be allowed to come in from the United States duty free. If our people are going to pay this assistance, then I think we at least have the right to ask that this assistance be put in another form so that the hay can be transported and there may be an equalization of the supply between eastern and western Canada.
The hay in northern Ontario, when delivered in the province of Manitoba with the freight rate that is now applied, will not cost as much as the Manitoba government paid last year in order to go to the United States
[The Chairman.]
and bring hay into that province. It is my understanding that they paid $34 last year for a limited quantity of hay. I feel quite sure that the ridings of Cochrane and Timis-kaming can supply hay to that area at a lower price than that. If we give some assistance-and there is no objection to giving this kind of assistance-then I think we should at least be fair to the rest of the Canadian farmers, and should not ask them to subsidize something for the advantage not of their own farmers but of United States farmers. If we are going to put the matter on an assistance basis, let us at least keep it in Canada and let us try to help all the farmers in the various parts of Canada where-ever it seems to be advantageous or even possible to do so.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: I noticed that the hon. member stated that northern Ontario had a good crop of hay. I am glad to know that in his riding such may have been the case last year. I also note that he took exception to the remarks I made. In doing so he showed that he knows little about my riding. The farmers in my riding will certainly understand that he does not give much consideration to farming in my district. The farmers of my district are in dire need of assistance, and they have been asking the Ontario government to come to their aid. We are not opposing this amount at all. We are absolutely in favour of it. I simply asked the minister whether any requests had been made by the government of Ontario, and the answer was no. That goes to show that the government of Ontario has little interest in the riding of Cochrane, and I can see that the hon. member for Timiskaming is very little interested in the riding of Cochrane.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I am not going to speak for the riding of the hon. member. His farmers have the advantage of being a little closer to the western market than farmers in my riding, and I presume there would be an advantage from the point of view of freight rates from his area as compared with mine.
I am in no way disagreeing as to the need for assistance. We need assistance in my riding because for the last three years the farmers have not been able to sell their hay. I am only suggesting that when there is a great need in western Canada, the farmers of Cochrane might also like to be able to sell some of their hay to western Canada. I am simply opposed to the setting up of conditions providing for the importing of hay from the United States rather than using the money involved to bring about an equalization of the supply and demand in Canada for the benefit of our farmers. No matter how you look at it, even those farmers in the hon. member's riding of

Cochrane north, who are in very serious circumstances will have to pay toward this assistance, and I think they should be given the opportunity to sell the hay they produce if it is to the advantage of the Canadian economy and will not cost any more money. I object to us paying any money to assist farmers in another country while there is still a great need in our own country and a supply of hay available. I believe the matter could be worked out if consideration were given to it.
This is not something new. I have raised the matter with the Minister of Agriculture; I have telephoned him several times. The department discussed the matter and looked at the price. I think I am being fair in saying that in the early days of the drought in Manitoba some of the officials there thought there was not going to be enough hay available, and panic buying of a limited quantity of hay brought about a very high price. Because of the high price we made the suggestion that assistance be given with respect to transportation costs so that hay could be moved from northern Ontario, where I am informed by the farmers there is a surplus. It is only with this in mind that I am opposed to the lowering of the customs barriers, because obviously the money involved would come out of the Canadian treasury and our Canadian farmers would not necessarily be assisted.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: I want the hon. member to know that the farmers of Cochrane riding-he referred to it as Cochrane north-would be well satisfied to take all the hay they need from the hon. member's riding if they had the assistance of the province and the federal government. As a matter of fact they need it badly.


John (Jack) McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, I think the last two speakers have been talking about two other problems with which this item does not deal.


William Arnold Peters: We are paying for this.


John (Jack) McIntosh: Let me explain. The hon. member for Timiskaming said that we could bring the cattle down through northern Ontario on the way to market. The cattle for which the feed was required were breeding stock. The feeders were all shipped out of western Canada as soon as possible. With regard to the surplus of hay in northern Ontario and other parts of that province, as a result of the plan implemented by this government there was no shortage of fodder in western Canada. Under the plan implemented by the government, crops that would not yield more than three bushels per acre were cut for fodder. Consequently there was enough fodder left on the prairies for the
Supply-Agriculture
requirements. In fact in my own constituency, which I believe was one of the hardest hit in Saskatchewan, I visited many municipalities with regard to the program implemented by the government and in not one municipality was the demand for fodder greater than the amount that had been cut for that purpose in that municipality.
The hon. member for Assiniboia talked about the importation of fodder from the United States. It was the farmer's own decision whether he went to the United States, brought in hay and paid the duty or whether he went to northern Saskatchewan and paid the extra cost of hauling. In addition, it was as a result of the farmers' request in the first place that the duty was imposed, so that hay would not come into Canada from the United States in good times. They cannot have it both ways.


Hazen Robert Argue: I think they can in an emergency. This is a special case.


John (Jack) McIntosh: There was not the emergency that the hon. member says there was. Fodder was available in Saskatchewan, and they could have obtained it there.


Hazen Robert Argue: The best source of fodder for the people in this area was the source closest to home. In certain instances the fodder closest to home was in the United States, but if they went 10 miles from home across the United States boundary they had to pay a duty which simply increased the amount of money in the Canadian exchequer, and I claim this is definitely discrimination in an emergency.


John (Jack) McIntosh: How many tons were involved?


Mr. Muir (Lisgar):: Mr. Chairman, I did not realize that land rehabilitation and irrigation came under this item.


Paul Raymond Martineau: No, they come under the next item, No. 616.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Irrigation and water storage projects in the western provinces including the South Saskatchewan river project; the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act program; land protection, reclamation and development-
616. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $3,200,000.
John Angus MacLean: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a brief statement on item 616 by way of explanation to the committee. Because of the severe drought conditions that prevailed in the prairie provinces throughout 1961 there was an unprecedented demand for assistance in the development of individual

Supply-Agriculture
farm and community water conservation projects and to provide pasture and feed facilities. Almost twice as many small farm water projects as in any previous year, consisting of dugouts, stock watering dams and small irrigation projects, were constructed to help to meet the critical situation. In addition, more of the larger community storage projects were constructed than planned, and an emergency federal-provincial-municipal well drilling program was initiated last fall to provide water for communities. Under this program the federal and provincial governments each contribute 35 per cent of the cost of a well and the municipality 30 per cent. Some 100 applications for such wells have been approved to date.
More community pasture facilities and more feed bases had to be provided in those areas most affected by the drought to preserve farmers' basic herds and reduce unseasonable marketing. This was accomplished by constructing a large community pasture of 140,000 acres in the British block in Alberta and a smaller one in Manitoba. These projects were not anticipated for 1961-62. In addition, a feed base for several hundred head of cattle was set up at Craven, Saskatchewan, where pelleted grain screenings were fed at a nominal cost to the farmers.
As a result of the situation created by the drought it is estimated that expenditures will exceed the amount provided in the main estimates by $1 million under the small water development program and by $100,000 under the community pasture program. The balance of the additional amount of $3,200,000 required consists of $500,000 for the St. Mary's irrigation project in Alberta and $1,600,000 for the South Saskatchewan dam.
Construction of the Waterton dam on the St. Mary's project was started in 1960 and will be completed in 1962. The South Saskatchewan dam was started in 1958 and will be completed in 1965. The additional amounts mentioned for the projects for 1962, totalling $2,100,000, are required because the works in progress advanced at a faster rate than expected. This was largely due to the abnormally dry season, which made it possible for the large earth-moving contracts to be carried out without interruption. The constant dry weather also helped to speed up the work on other contracts, although not to the same degree as the earth-moving contracts.
I should like to emphasize, Mr. Chairman, that these further amounts do not represent increases in the total cost of these projects. We are merely advancing into this fiscal year money that it was originally expected

would not be required until the next fiscal year. I might add that the amount for this item in the main estimates for this fiscal year was $18,322,297.


George Robson Muir: I should like to say a few words on this particular item and on the importance of an irrigation and water storage program, not only to the area I represent but to the whole of the fertile Red river valley and to the western provinces. The serious drought experienced by the prairie provinces last year points up the necessity for an extensive program of land and water conservation. In my own area the farmers are appreciative of the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, and this tremendous program of building farm dugouts and dams is one of the most important undertaken by the federal Department of Agriculture.
Experience over the years has shown us that these water storage programs will pay large dividends in the development of our prairie economy. In my constituency the spring water running down the streams and rivers from what we call the Pembina escarpment is largely lost to that particular part of the country. The building of dams in this area is a definite must if the fullest development of our agricultural economy is to be achieved.
Further to this, I should like to express my appreciation of the fact that this is recognized not only by the government of Manitoba but by our own federal Department of Agriculture. I should also like to express my appreciation of the auspicious start that has been made on this program in our area in the building of the Stephen-field dam on the Boyne river, which will be started this spring. I sincerely believe that a continuation of the program of water storage will turn out to be one of the most important developments in prairie agriculture. We only have to listen to the figures the minister gave a few moments ago to realize how this development is being encouraged, not only by the governments of the prairie provinces but also by the federal government. I am sure all members will join me in saying that this is one of the most important developments to take place, and one which will probably be taken over by ARDA to make land and water rehabilitation a reality.
(Translation):


Samuel Boulanger: Mr. Chairman, we certainly have no objection to the adoption of those items since they will hasten construction of the dam on the Saskatchewan river and the carrying out of other irrigation projects.

In the past, we have often said that the scope of this measure should be widened so that all Canadian farmers could benefit from it. We would like it to have a bearing on the whole of Canada.
I appreciate that western farmers are to benefit from this measure; it is justified by the farmers' water supply and especially by the construction of the dam on the Saskatchewan river.
However, if we consider the possibilities resulting from the irrigation of the land along the Saskatchewan river, we find that there will be half a million more acres of farmland once the projects are completed and the irrigation system is installed.
I understand that this area will be used to produce grain crops and also, perhaps, feed crops, but more especially grain crops.
No doubt that the Saskatchewan river dam project will then be justified, because it will enable us to produce more grain to help supply the foreign markets, which should still be large enough at that time.
I should like to ask the minister to keep in mind our suggestion that the possibility of extending this measure to all provinces be examined. While our problems may not be the same as those of western Canada, they do exist. In the east, our problems relate mainly to soil drainage and stone clearing. Much of our land could be made suitable for agriculture if it were cleared of stones and well drained. The cost of such undertakings would not be too high.
I understand that, in 1962, there will probably be appropriations for ARDA, but for the time being we cannot anticipate that measure, because the minister, who has been talking about it for four years, has never voted the necessary estimates. There is nothing in the speech from the throne to indicate that the government intended to further extend the application of that measure.
I am sure that eastern farmers will be happy when these estimates are voted for western farmers, but just the same, they would be still happier if the measure were extended so as to cover the whole of Canada. (Text):


Mr. Winch:: Mr. Chairman, vote 616 of the
further supplementary estimates asks for an additional amount of $3,200,000 to be divided between two aspects of the department. As
Supply-Agriculture
I understand it, the original estimate was in the neighbourhood of $18 million, which amount we are now being asked to increase. It is my understanding that because this involves an increase of over $3 million in a general estimate, we can discuss briefly certain aspects of general policy as applied not only to what is asked for in the supplementary estimates but also in general under the item of the general estimates.
I am particularly interested in the wording of the first section of vote 616, the heading of which is "Land rehabilitation, irrigation and water storage projects". This is followed by "Irrigation and water storage projects in the western provinces..." As the committee knows, I come from the province of British Columbia, and sometimes I cannot help wondering what the government classifies as the western provinces. I am rather inclined, especially in view of the original vote and the supplementary item, to think there is a great tendency to believe that the western provinces of Canada end at the Rocky mountains, forgetting that the Rocky mountains are just a geographical, mountainous boundary between Alberta and British Columbia.
Admittedly the most westerly province is divided by four mountain ranges, but within those mountain ranges are a number of valleys. These valleys have to a great extent in the past required for their agricultural development-and they require it now-exactly what is set forth as the heading of the supplementary estimate we are now considering, namely land rehabilitation, irrigation and water storage projects.
I have had the privilege of living in British Columbia for 52 years. During that period of time I can remember that the interior of British Columbia was once tantamount to being a desert, growing nothing, but because of water storage and irrigation we now have the most beautiful and agriculturally productive area of Canada known as the Okanagan. However, there is still a great deal that can be done in the way of land rehabilitation and irrigation and water storage projects, shall I say between the city of Armstrong and the town of Osoyoos. I now wish to deal with an area which I know well but which is better known by the hon. member for Kootenay West. I refer to the Creston area, where not too many years ago it was not a matter of irrigation but of land reclamation. This area is now one of the most productive in that part of British Columbia.
The Minister of Agriculture mentioned a few minutes ago that we have a general expenditure of $18 million, and we now have a supplementary estimate of $3,200,000 in connection with land rehabilitation, irrigation and

Supply-Agriculture
water storage projects. In view of these estimates I think the committee will understand why I rise in my seat and ask why it is that, whether it be under the general estimates or the supplementary estimates, the government thinks that Canada ends at the Rocky mountains. I maintain that with proper planning of projects and expenditures my province could give a greater productive return than perhaps any other province. I do not object to any money that is spent in any province of Canada, but why are we so completely and totally ignored in this matter of irrigation, water storage, land reclamation and rehabilitation?
I ask this question not only because I am a member from the province of British Columbia but from my knowledge of the whole of Canada, and particularly, after 52 years, my knowledge of my home province. What is the policy regarding land rehabilitation, irrigation and water storage projects as far as the government is concerned? Why is it that we have been ignored, and is there any possibility or any hope at all of this government raising their sights and looking over the Rockies to that paradise of Canada on the Pacific coast, the province of British Columbia? Our province does not only produce forest and mineral products; it is also an agricultural producer with a potentiality that could give magnificent returns to the benefit of the economy of Canada and the greater security of our people if the program of rehabilitation, reclamation, irrigation and water storage is applied to it as it is rightly being applied to the provinces mentioned by the Acting Minister of Agriculture and those hon. members who spoke earlier.


Mr. Regnier:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to express to the Department of Agriculture my satisfaction for last year building two dams on the La Salle river, namely at Starbuck and La Salle. In addition, the contract has now been awarded for the building of a third dam at Elie.
The La Salle river passes very close to the Assiniboine river, and requires that a high level of water be maintained. This can only be done by the diversion of water from the Assiniboine to the La Salle river. This could be done in many ways; it could even be done just by pumping. I understand that a floodway is being constructed, and a great deal of water could be sent through the Assiniboine river during the dry season in the summer to maintain a high level of water in that river. It would be a very easy matter to divert some of this water to the La Salle river, which is not very long. There are farmers all along its course. In some areas these farmers depend entirely on the La Salle river for their water supply in the summer and even in the winter.

Mr. Chairman, before resuming my seat I should like to again express my satisfaction for the speedy manner in which the department has dealt with this problem.


Mr. Nasserden:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make one or two suggestions arising out of the well drilling program undertaken this year by the government. This program was really appreciated by the farmers on the prairies, and particularly by those in my area. These farmers feel the program should be extended in the future and should perhaps become as widespread as the dugout construction program in the P.F.R.A. areas of western Canada. In many areas the dugout is not a suitable source of supply for water and a well is a more reliable source, especially when livestock are kept. I should like to express to the minister and to the government the appreciation of the people of Birch Hills and the surrounding area for the large storage and flood control project which was undertaken on Cromarty creek in the railway municipality of Birch Hills. I believe it will be an addition to that area, and that the people will be happy with it.
I believe the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska said he would be happy if P.F.R.A. were extended to the people of eastern Canada. Well, if we go back to the time when that act was first brought in and, later, to the time when its benefits were somewhat extended, we find that the Liberals forgot eastern Canada in the legislation of that day. Now, under the ARDA program, the present government has remembered that there are farmers in eastern Canada who are interested not only in conservation but in the development of projects of this kind. I do not like to say anything more in that regard. However, each time the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska gets up he says "We are happy to see this thing pass, but we would like some of the benefit for eastern Canada as well". I would point out that some of these provisions were made necessary in western Canada because we experienced drought there; perhaps they did not have a drought in eastern Canada.


Chesley William Carter: Too much wind out there in the west. It dries everything up.


Edward Nasserden: I see the man who wants to sell freedom with wheat is speaking now. I know the farmers of western Canada will appreciate that remark.
The Saskatchewan river dam project is, of course, an important one and this year, after we have had a drought in western Canada, everyone out there realizes just how important it is. They also realize that had it been proceeded with at a time when many

people were giving lip service to the idea it might already have proved of great value to people in areas represented by the hon. member for Assiniboia, the hon. member for Swift Current-Maple Creek, the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar and others in Saskatchewan.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I had not intended to take any part in this discussion, but I do not think I can let the remarks of the hon. member for Rosthern pass without a word of comment. The hon. member said the Liberals had ignored eastern Canada. He would not say that in the presence of the hon. member for Cumberland or the hon. member for Westmorland, because each of those members knows what was done about maritime marshland drainage, which was begun immediately after the war by the previous Liberal government. The hon. member is apparently unaware of the legislation which was put on the statute books when Mr. Winters was the minister responsible for the department of resources and development with respect to water conservation in other parts of eastern Canada.
I should like to say a word of appreciation for the work which was begun by the late James Gardiner in assisting pilot projects for the drainage of the bogs in Newfoundland.
I am glad the present government are continuing this work and I hope they will see fit to extend it much more widely. We do not encounter the problem of drought very often, though we did last year. Normally our problem is that we have too much water: we would be glad to have the hon. member for Rosthern come down and cart some of it away.
Notwithstanding the fact that my hon. friend from Drummond-Arthabaska is quite right in pointing out that these programs should be extended to all parts of the country, it is wrong to say that the Liberal government neglected the east. Of course, in the days of the dust bowl when P.F.R.A. was started it was an urgent national problem in the sense that these other problems are not. We all know that one of the reasons the dust bowl has not returned is the splendid work done by P.F.R.A. in all the years since.


Hazen Robert Argue: I want to congratulate the minister on the able way in which he is dealing with estimates with which he has not had the opportunity of close association. He is an acting Acting Minister of Agriculture.
I know there is really not such a post, but he is acting minister in the absence of the acting minister. This government has become known as a government of travelling cabinet ministers. It is a government composed of
Supply-Agriculture
cabinet ministers who are able to engage in many extracurricular activities.


An hon. Member:: We heard about your travels yesterday.


Hazen Robert Argue: At this particular stage, when an election is not too far away the practice seems to be more prevalent than it has ever been. However, I did not know that this practice was extending to parliamentary secretaries as well. Now the acting Acting Minister of Agriculture is fortified with two parliamentary secretaries to the Minister of Agriculture. But I have been looking around for them all the morning-


John Angus MacLean: I do not think the hon. member wants to be unfair. I think he missed what I said when the first vote was called. At that point I explained the absence of the two parliamentry secretaries to the minister. One is in the veterans hospital here; I think it is not too serious a matter, but it prevents his being in the house. The other is absent because of the death of a close relative.


Hazen Robert Argue: I apologize. I am sorry for having started along that line, and I thank the minister for interrupting me and giving me this information before I was in the embarrassing position of having said something for which I would be sorry. I hope the parliamentary secretary will soon be out of the hospital and, of course, we are sympathetic toward any colleague who has suffered a bereavement in the family.
Now I come to the item under discussion. I want to say, along with the hon. member from Rosthern, that one of the features of this vote which should be given special consideration at this time is the whole question of deep water wells. The program of dams and dug-outs has been well developed over many years, and the experience in this field is considerable! However, the experience with deep water wells is relatively new. This is a new field which has been pioneered. One of the many reasons why deep water wells are now much more feasible than in the past is the fact that the vast majority of farms on the prairies are now supplied with electricity, which makes these wells exceedingly practicable as a source of water supply for livestock.
As the minister has said, this has been an emergency program brought forward to provide under this item for the drilling of deep water wells in a joint program in co-operation with the provinces and the municipalities. It should be made clear that these deep water wells have not been drilled for individual farmers, but are what are called community wells. I take it they are public property, the property of the municipality, although federal and provincial government money has gone

Supply-Agriculture into their construction. All farmers have access to these so-called community wells.
I understood the minister to say the cost was divided on the basis of a 35 per cent contribution on the part of each of the two major governments and a 30 per cent contribution on the part of the municipality. This is only a detail which the minister is free to check, but I understood the division of cost was on the basis of 374 Per cent, 374 Per cent and 25 per cent. One of us is right and one wrong, and probably the minister is right.
The latest information I have is that this program will end on March 31. If there has been an extension I wish to hear about it, and if not I plead with the government to extend this valuable addition to a long term water conservation program at least to the forthcoming full fiscal year, if not permanently. If there was a valid reason for drilling wells in the emergency drought during the past year, the same reason would apply to extending this excellent program in the coming fiscal year. All the federal government can do is make the offer, and I plead with the government to negotiate with the provincial governments for a continuation of the program if not on a permanent basis at least for the coming year, as a minimum extension.
I wish to advance a second proposal. Joint programs are the best. I urge the government to introduce a federal-provincial-municipal program to assist individual farmers to obtain deep water walls. Such a well represents an expensive undertaking. A dugout may be obtained for $500 or $600, but deep water wells often cost $1,000 or $2,000 or more. I wish to be fair to the minister and the government. I have discussed this question with departmental officials at both the federal and provincial levels. The federal government and the government of Saskatchewan both make the same reply to this suggestion. They say it is an excellent one in which they would like to participate, but they are afraid it would lead to their subsidizing, with the assistance of the individual farmers, a group of inexperienced fly by night drillers of deep water wells who are more interested in making a profit than in providing efficient wells. Apparently it is a problem to find competent, reliable drillers in this intricate field, and of course it is difficult for the individual farmer to assess the reliability and competence of a driller.
The federal government could perhaps arrange through the provincial governments for the licensing of drillers on the basis of their qualifications. What I am about to say comes within the purview of provincial government jurisdiction. Perhaps the provincial government could provide a few drilling outlets as pilot undertakings so experience could be

gained in the field. If the provincial government obtained a few rigs and operated them in that kind of work there would be immediate control over the operation and there would be the additional advantage of experience in the field being gained.
In my judgment deep water wells are no longer a luxury. They provide an excellent and convenient source of water for livestock. They are often necessary if farmers are to enjoy the sewer and water advantages so long enjoyed by those in urban centres.
I am not being critical of the minister, as I know he will appreciate. This is an excellent program as far as it has been developed. There are technical difficulties readily admitted by those in the federal and provincial departments of agriculture. This seems all the more reason for providing leadership and taking action so that at an early date not only communities but individual farmers may have the advantage and convenience of deep water wells for the watering of livestock and family use on the farm.


Mr. Henderson:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to speak on this subject, but I shall now call it one o'clock.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Walter Clarence Henderson: I was trying very hard, Mr. Chairman, to get to my feet before lunch but I could not make it. The various members who have spoken have been talking about their homeland or where they came from and they made me think of a school poem:
Breathes there the man, with soul so dead, Who never to himself hath said,
This is my own, my native landl
Apparently they were all from their native land. I come from the constituency of Cariboo which is as large as the state of Texas. We have everything. We have oil, gold and silver. In fact, a man from this country took $3 million in gold out of Cariboo camp. We have a great deal of oil. We have thousands of men working in the oil fields. The only problem is to get a market for the oil. We have agriculture which compares favourably with the best in Canada. The Peace River area, that gem in the tiara of diamonds, is situated in my constituency. Anybody who has ever been there comes back. We have had people leave and go to California but they came back to the

Peace River country. It is the most prosperous part of Canada right today. I do not say this in any idle way. We have mixed farming which compares favourably with that in the best parts of Iowa or Indiana. The farmers have cattle yards. We had a bumper crop last year. We were not in a part of Canada which was dry and about which all the discussion has taken place. However, we are short of water. We are obliged to dig extremely deep wells. The town of Vanderhoof is in the constituency of Cariboo, and the well went dry there. I think dirt fell in it or something of that kind. However, the government came right to the rescue and dug another well. It was necessary to go to a depth of 500 feet or 600 feet. The whole town was out of water until they obtained this well. I was there and saw what they were doing. The government came right to the assistance of the town.
I think this government is to be congratulated on the way in which they have handled the water situation. Our country was dry. We had very little rain. However, we had a wonderful crop. Another rain would have made all the difference in the world. We had 40 bushels to the acre on the average through there, and a great deal of feed in the form of alfalfa that we could have shipped out. However, apparently nobody wanted the feed. A few carloads were shipped out, but we had hundreds of carloads that could have been shipped out. To give the Minister of Agriculture credit, I think he did a wonderful job in keeping the cattle from being rushed on to the market. In this way the price was kept right. Many people would have gone broke had they been obliged to throw their cattle on the market as was done back in the old days. We were raising cattle and the grass was burned out in the early days. There was no feed in the country. It was grass country. The grass got burned and we were obliged to sell our cattle. We received $12.50 a cow with a good calf thrown in. You do not make much money under those conditions. This year, however, we had plenty of crop but, as I say, we were short of water. For our water supply we depend on dugouts or scoopouts. The government had various units in there, digging these scoopouts. It is not necessary to pay spot cash for them, it Is possible to pay for them on terms.
What any farmer would ever hold against this government is beyond me. I have been in that country for 50 years. We lived in there in the old days under the Liberal 26207-1-774
Supply-Agriculture
regime and it was absolutely the worst one that has ever been seen so far as the farmer is concerned.


An hon. Member:: He was the forgotten man.


Walter Clarence Henderson: That is true; he was the forgotten man. However, this government apparently see the farmer and have done everything they could to help him. I will tell you this, Mr. Chairman, I would not be here if it was not for the assurance that they will win again. They will win easily in that country. As I say, the Minister of Agriculture has done a wonderful job and we are getting lots of water out of the scoopouts. I have had a letter from my riding saying that we have had snow but the ground is black. We will have a snowstorm one night and chinook winds will come along and fill all the gullies with water. As I said, and I am not boasting, it is the most prosperous part of Canada and it makes my heart bleed when I see these farmers in this part of Canada. There was talk about moving people from the maritimes. We could have taken a lot of those fellows. We have an empire there, and there is not only farming but the farmers have oil wells. Everything is prosperous there.
I am not going to blow too much about my riding because I do not believe it needs any support. When the president of the Fraser Valley association was there at the convention the other day he said that his brother and he were dreaming of getting to the Peace River. They are growing strawberries or something like that, and he said that he and his brother had to get out there. That is their dream. I see my friend the lobsterman smiling, but we have plenty of cattle feed and things will be very prosperous there this year.
As I have said, I do not know why anybody would vote against such a government.
I believe we have leading us the greatest statesman since confederation. I was angered a little the other day when a speaker on the other side was lambasting the Prime Minister because I do not like to see a good man knocked. I would not lambaste one of them if I thought he was any good. Yes, it made my heart bleed when I heard this member lambasting the Prime Minister. Our grandchildren in years to come will be told about this famous statesman. He is going to continue as Prime Minister. He will be returned to office because the people of western Canada-I do not know anything about Quebec-


Mr. Ricard:: The same thing.


Walter Clarence Henderson: -will not turn him down. He has done more for western Canada than

Supply-Agriculture
any other man. This government has done a wonderful job with regard to the water situation in the Peace River and Cariboo district. They have been digging dugouts and scoop-outs. We have five big scoopouts at home on the farm and they are designed so that one will pump into another. We do not irrigate but there is irrigation in the Cariboo. It is a wonderful part of Canada. It is prosperous and doing well, and so I will not say any more.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I always enjoy listening to the expert on barbershops, barbecues and bulls. He always makes a very interesting address with a lot of homespun wisdom in it. However, in view of the development of the debate on this item I cannot resist saying a few words because of the philosophy of this group which is based on the conservation and development of human and natural resources. On that account this is an important item so far as this group is concerned.
Before proceeding further, I want to support the remarks of the hon. member for Vancouver East and the other members who have spoken in favour of the extension of the application of the policy contained in this vote for land rehabilitation, irrigation and water storage projects. I mention this because there is a particular need in British Columbia which is of increasing importance. Only a few days ago the minister of agriculture for British Columbia, Mr. Richter, addressed the British Columbia fruit growers association in Vernon and stressed the importance of preserving every acre of the 2 per cent of our land suitable for agriculture and settlement. In that address he said that we cannot spare a single acre in British Columbia or destroy a single acre.
I hope the Minister of Justice will keep that in mind when he is contemplating the flooding of about 50,000 acres in east and west Kootenay if the Columbia treaty goes through as now arranged.


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


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Certainly.


David Vaughan Pugh: Are you in favour of the development of the Columbia river?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am in favour of the development of the Columbia river without any unnecessary destruction of natural resources. I mention this because in British Columbia we have the climate and the soil. I am not blowing like the hon. member who preceded me or even exaggerating when I say that in our district we have numerous farmers who take $1,000 a year in produce per acre off their land year after year. I can think of one

vegetable grower, a neighbour of mine, who lives about nine miles from me. He takes up to $15,000 a year gross from nine acres of beautiful black muck soil beside the lake.
I think of another who takes close to $40,000 off 100 acres and I know of another who takes over $37,000 off 300 acres. I know of numerous fruit growers who take an average of $1,000 a year in peaches and cherries from their orchards which average five acres in extent.
I mention this to emphasize the value of good land in circumstances such as ours and in the Okanagan, where water can be used on a vast scale if it is properly stored in the first instance and diverted to use for Canadian agriculture. Without any partisan approach whatever, I emphasize that there is a great opportunity for the government to make this a national policy and to conserve and develop this land.
Mind you, this is a natural field for government. This is something that cannot be done unless there is government action on the federal and provincial levels. It is something that is beyond the capacity of private interests or, shall I say, beyond the normal sphere of private interests, and there is a wonderful opportunity here for a national policy based on the principles of the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act. In connection with my statement that I think government action is required, I wish to quote very briefly from the excellent compilation of background papers of the resources for tomorrow conference held in Montreal from October 23 to October 28, 1961. One article is entitled, "Objectives and organizational arrangements for multipurpose development and management of water resources" and it reads in part as follows:
Water development and management In accord with the objectives and value standards of modem society will increasingly depend on governmental action. A variety of forces at work in modern society suggest that more and more emphasis will be placed on intangible values. This tendency, combined with the economic characteristics of water resources, underscores the necessity of relying primarily on governmental institutions to achieve the objectives of water development and management.
In British Columbia water development and management are very closely related to agriculture. In the constituency which I have the honour to represent there are thousands of acres of rich land that could be brought into cultivation if they were drained, for instance, if the Duncan river were lowered six feet by dredging, and there are thousands of acres that can be brought into cultivation by irrigation. There is a far greater acreage that can be brought into cultivation by irrigation in the ridings represented by the hon. members for Okanagan Boundary and Okanagan-Revel-stoke.

There is a tremendous opportunity here so I urge that, particularly in connection with power potential and land rehabilitation, we do not just look at water resources from the point of view of kilowatts and power, necessary as they may be. I think the two can be developed together without any unnecessary destruction of land, which is growing more valuable every year with the increase in world population, and without any unnecessary, shall I say, giving away of water resources that will be required to irrigate this land in British Columbia and the prairie provinces.
Once again I say that in British Columbia we have the climate, we have the soil, and all we need is an extension of this type of legislation so that we could conserve that soil by irrigation, by drainage and in other ways.


Mr. Cooper:: I did not intend to take part in this debate, but there were one or two things said this morning which I could not allow to go unchallenged. We are in what you would call the dry belt of Saskatchewan, where last year the dugouts went dry. This government increased up to $240 the grants to farmers for the purpose of constructing these dugouts and also for assisting municipalities in digging deep wells. These wells will be for public use. In our immediate vicinity we have to go down between 400 and 500 feet, and we get artesian wells. We have one well in our vicinity that flowed at the rate of 45 gallons a minute and it served the people for miles around.
The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate made one statement which I cannot allow to go unchallenged. He said that the former administration had made a great study of the Saskatchewan river dam. I was a member of a committee out west which met the hon. member when he came out west, and we had met with every minister of the former administration who came west during the last 20 years to put this project before them. We met the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate in Moose Jaw, and he said, "We have bogs in Newfoundland that we could drain and bring into production at a cost of $65 per acre, whereas your project, Saskatchewan river dam is costing $3,000 an acre". Well now, 500,000 acres at $3,000 an acre comes to around $1,500 million. If you allot all the costs pertaining to the dam to irrigation alone, you will find you arrive at a figure which is less than one fifteenth of that figure he gave. I cannot, therefore, allow the statement to go unchallenged that he made a study of the Saskatchewan river dam when, out of the blue sky, he could pull this
Supply-Agriculture
figure and give it to these committee representatives who had been promoting this project for the last 15 years. I am sorry the hon. member is not in his seat so that he could reply to that statement.
(Translation):


Samuel Boulanger: I congratulate the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. Henderson) who managed to speak for 20 minutes without dealing with the subject under discussion, that is, the estimate for $3.2 million. He only succeeded in making a good election speech and I should like to do the same.
I also congratulate the hon. member for Rosthern (Mr. Nasserden) who asked this morning why we pass such acts as the Prairie Farm Assistance Act and the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act. I must tell him that if we adopt those measures which were introduced by the Liberal government, it is because the latter realized at the time that western farmers were in need of assistance. I can speak about this, because in 1931 I spent over 12 months in the province of Alberta. I also had the opportunity of visiting the province of Saskatchewan which was then in the grip of a terrible drought. It was following that drought that the Liberal government implemented those acts. I am willing to give the Conservative government credit for having introduced the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act but it is the Liberal party which has seen it through. We voted for it because we were aware of the western farmers' situation and we felt sympathy for them.
There seems to be some feeling that we are not justified to speak of the problems found in eastern Canada. I should not want to sound prejudiced but I think our present laws do not give enough protection to eastern farmers. Members from Quebec know that. If only they had the courage to say so. That is why I congratulate the hon. member for Rosthern who one day had the courage to express his views on certain agricultural legislation.
Last year I asked the Minister of Agriculture if he was thinking of extending the coverage of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act to other parts of Canada.
Here is what I said on this matter, on April 12, 1961, as found at page 3603 of Hansard (page 2 of the English translation), when I put the question to the Minister of Agriculture in these words:
Mr. Chairman, in connection with this item 36,
I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture, arising out of a statement he made recently to the effect that the Prairie Farm Assistance Act would be extended to the whole of Canada. Would he like to comment on that?

Supply-Agriculture
To which the Minister of Agriculture replied:
The Prairie Farm Assistance Act applies only to the prairie areas. The statement I made some months ago was that the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act should be applied to Canada as a whole because it is concerned with the rehabilitation of water and soil resources. I feel a similar type of act should be provided for the whole of Canada.
That was put on the official record last year. And I should like to ask the acting minister if it is the intention of the government to extend the scope of this legislation to all the provinces in Canada.
(Text):


Mr. Souiham:: Mr. Chairman, I feel that I would be remiss in my duty this afternoon if I did not take part in this discussion concerning agriculture, and specifically this item on land rehabilitation, irrigation and water storage. I think it is well known to my colleagues and other members of the house that I come from a part of Canada which has had the recurring problem of drought. Even in my short life span I have experienced three of these serious drought cycles.
In commencing my remarks on this particular item I should like, first of all, to congratulate our present Minister of Agriculture on the very positive action he has taken in connection with this matter. I am referring to last year's drought as far as Saskatchewan and western Canada are concerned. It points up in effect how this government has taken a realistic view of some of the problems of agriculture. I wish to congratulate our government on their national agricultural program. In fact I can assure the committee that in the eyes of the agricultural population of this country this government is fast becoming famous through our Minister of Agriculture for their national agricultural program.
This agricultural program not only deals with the over-all problem but also with regional problems, and the item we are discussing this afternoon deals with a serious recurring problem of a regional nature that we experience in the west. I come from a part of Saskatchewan that has one of the highest cattle populations per capita compared to anywhere in Canada. Not only has it a high cattle population, but the quality of the cattle raised in our area is second to none. As proof of this statement I would point out that at a recent royal winter fair in Toronto at which I was a visitor, I discovered that there were 101 head of cattle which came from the province of Saskatchewan and had been selected by the livestock associations of that province. Out of the 101 head of cattle selected for exhibition purposes, 36 head came from the great riding of Moose Mountain. I am reminded that the balance came from Swift

Current-Maple Creek. I cannot assure the committee that this information with respect to Swift Current is absolutely authentic, but I do know they raise a lot of good cattle in Swift Current-Maple Creek.
The fact is that with these purebred, high quality herds water is naturally a very important factor in the economy of that part of the country. In the discussion today mention has been made of emergency fodder banks, and so on. This program is very important, but coupled with it is the emergency program of water conservation. I am thinking now of dugouts, small dams and also the emergency well drilling program that was put into effect last fall. This program was very timely and helped to maintain quite a number of basic herds in our area.
I was very glad to hear the Acting Minister of Agriculture, the Minister of Fisheries, mention that there had been at least 100 applications under this emergency well drilling program. I know that a number of them were from the riding of Moose Mountain. I might suggest in passing that like any other new regulation or emergency measure there were a few doubts about the plan, but it did work very well.
I make the following suggestion to the committee. Because of the great importance of water conservation to areas such as the one in which I live in Saskatchewan, I think that any way in which we can propagate the over-all development of P.F.R.A. should be considered on a permanent basis. The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar mentioned the south Saskatchewan dam. We feel this is the grand-daddy of the whole project of water conservation in the prairies and western Canada, and I hope to live to see the day when we not only have that dam completed on the great south Saskatchewan river but when we will have other dams along its tributaries and other rivers in Saskatchewan, and Manitoba for that matter, which will preserve the precipitation we have in the west which presently runs away through our streams into the oceans.
In my area of Moose Mountain, under the water conservation program that we are now considering in the supplementary estimates we have experienced the co-operation of the government. I should again like to take this opportunity to thank our Minister of Agriculture, and through him the cabinet, for the attention that has been given to the water shortage problem in my riding. I am referring to the assistance we have received in connection with a dam on the Souris river at Oxbow, Saskatchewan, which was completed a year ago. Also, an appropriation of $110,000 has been granted for a new

dam at Gainsborough, which happens to be my home municipality. In addition, according to information I have just received another appropriation has been allocated for a dam at Lightning creek, Redvers, and I understand that consideration has been given to building one at Maryfield. These are very, very important to my area. This program comes under this supplementary estimate and I know the constituents of Moose Mountain greatly appreciate the co-operation I have received from this government in regard to this very serious problem of water conservation.
I referred a moment ago to the emergency well drilling program. I discovered that in the application of this emergency legislation last fall there were a few criticisms with regard to the policy. One of them was that the farmers concerned thought the expenditure of $1,000 for the development of a well seemed to be unfair when it was decided to locate the well on one particular farm because it seemed to give that individual farmer an important benefit in comparison to the neighbouring farmers. The suggestion was made that perhaps the municipality, in conjunction with the province and with the agreement of the federal government, could make some provision whereby part of the cost of the well could be recovered from the farmer upon whose land the well was placed. If this suggestion were taken up, I think this objection would be overcome.
Another suggestion was made to me and I am in agreement with it. It was that we should not consider this just as an emergency well drilling program but should make it a permanent policy of, say three wells, every year in each municipality because under the present emergency provisions the municipality is allowed to drill three wells with government assistance at the federal and provincial levels. If this program were arranged in cooperation with the municipalities and the provinces to develop a well drilling program so that the cost could be spread over the next five or 10 years, a greater number of these emergency wells could be provided.
As I said at the beginning of my remarks, we have lived through three or four serious drought cycles and we can expect to have them again in the future. Rather than have an emergency develop when we will find a shortage of water in areas where we have these very important cattle herds, if these wells were provided for now they would be there and it would eliminate any emergency which might develop in the future. This, together with our very accelerated P.F.R.A. dugout program, the small dams program and
Supply-Agriculture
water conservation program such as we have in the south Saskatchewan project, and irrigation, would I think, in the long haul eliminate one of the greatest bugbears affecting the agricultural industry in Saskatchewan. We know we have one of the most highly productive areas in the world as far as wheat production and top quality cattle are concerned. We have these recurring droughts which cause an emergency, such as we encountered last fall.
That is all the remarks I wish to make this afternoon. I would repeat that we appreciate this program. I wish to support the supplementary estimates because these programs are very important to our part of the country which has to suffer these recurring droughts.


David Vaughan Pugh: Mr. Chairman, under the item for land protection, reclamation and development I wish that from some portions of my constituency I could help out the Saskatchewan farmers, particularly in the area of the hon. member who has just resumed his seat, that of Moose Mountain. We have a problem which is a little different. We have too much water; it comes off the mountain too quickly. I am referring specifically to the Similkameen river which is in my constituency. We have a similar situation on the Rock Creek river. These are both good sized rivers; in fact, I think they would make the Saskatchewan river look sick when they are in full spate. Briefly, our problem is that we have a high run-off, practically an uncontrollable run-off. We need federal and provincial help to tackle the engineering problem. I am hoping that ARDA, as its program develops, will have the answer.
Generally speaking, the agriculture policies brought in during the last five years have been excellent. We have felt their benefit in the Okanagan region the Similkameen region and over in the Grand Forks area just as, I imagine, people interested in agriculture have felt them all over Canada. It seems, however, that ARDA is in a state of flux at the present time. We know that a director has been appointed. Specifically, I should like the department to tell us at this time how far they have gone in the development of ARDA. Has the director met with the provincial ministers of agriculture, for instance? Have they developed a plan? In the case of British Columbia, have those concerned with this program actually got together or not?
To get back to the principal problem, the control of the Similkameen river presents a great many difficulties. I do not know whether the work would be undertaken by the provincial government in co-operation with the federal government and the local

Supply-Agriculture
authorities or whether it would be undertaken by one or other of those authorities, separately or in conjunction, but the solution of this engineering problem will not be easy. I think the work will in any case be expensive enough to warrant the federal government sharing the cost with the provincial and local authorities.
Referring specifically, once again, to ARDA,
I	have one more question to ask. Will this machinery be used in cases where a small area could be well served by the placing of a dam, and will it be used in conjunction with the work of provincial governments? What I am really doing is to seek information in order that, looking to the future, I may be able to advise my constituents how they can go about getting aid under the terms of this act.


Harold Edward Winch: I am sure all members of this committee were most happy that, after years of talking and promising, a federal government has been prepared to co-operate with a provincial government and bring into actuality the commencement of work on the south Saskatchewan dam. In the supplementary estimates which we are now considering under vote No. 616 there is detailed on page
II	an amount of $1,600,000 as the additional amount required in this fiscal year in connection with this scheme.
I wonder if the acting minister is now in a position to give the house a progress report on the south Saskatchewan project. Perhaps he could tell us not only what stage has been reached in the physical construction to date, but also something about the planning which has been done for the future. Important as agreement between the federal and provincial governments may be as far as the construction of the dam itself is concerned, undoubtedly one of the most vital factors is the planning for the utilization of the potential which will be made available in the areas of flood control and irrigation. Undoubtedly this will be an extensive phase of the new development of that area, and I have been wondering what proposals or agreements have been reached as to the method of developing the new irrigation areas and the sharing of responsibility between the federal and the provincial governments. I have been wondering also, whether provision is to be made for the giving of federal aid to the new areas during the formative years. These are matters which should not be left to the last few months. I think we would be most interested to know what information the minister can give us concerning progress made not only in connection with the dam itself but in respect to planning so as to utilize to the full the potential which this new project will

create. As I indicated, we would also be interested in the distribution of the cost and the amount of help which will be provided so that the people of this area may reap the fullest benefits in the shortest possible time.
(Translation):


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Chairman, I cannot let pass unnoticed the remarks made by my friend the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger). I want to comment on them, not to start a controversy but simply to put the record straight.
A few minutes ago, the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska tried to insinuate that we, from the province of Quebec in particular, did not have the courage to give our opinion on the emergency measures for western farmers.
I want to say first of all, Mr. Chairman, that we are very happy to see our friends in the west benefit from legislation enacted to help them when their crops fail. I might add that when a similar situation occurs in eastern Canada, the same thing is done. As a case in point, I would ask my hon. friend from Drummond-Arthabaska to go back to the time of the hog cholera epidemic in my constituency and his last year; he will recall how quickly the federal Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hamilton) took measures to remedy the situation.
My hon. friend from Drummond-Arthabaska surely remembers that some 400 herds of swine were affected and that it cost approximately $1,500,000 to the federal government to check the hog cholera.
I do not think we are doing either the eastern farmers or the western farmers a good turn by trying to stir up one group against the other.
I believe that we should concentrate our efforts and do our best in order that farmers may receive the same consideration, when they go through such hardships.
Since my hon. friend talked about the P.F.R.A. emergency fund, I would remind him that the western farmers had been contributing from 1939 to July 1960. They contributed about half of the amount paid back to them in grants.
Whenever a western farmer sells oats or grain of some kind, he is contributing to some extent to the emergency fund. I think we should give consideration to those factors and not raise a controversy, detrimental to both groups.
Let us join hands and we shall certainly succeed in giving satisfaction both to eastern and western farmers for neither the eastern nor the western farmers are seeking pure and

simple dole. They want their share and it is only fair that the government should wish to help them.
Please let us try to work together in the best interests of our agricultural group both in the west and in the east.
(Text):


Mr. Maiheson:: Mr. Chairman, under vote No. 617 the federal government is expending $3,888,693 covering contributions to Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta of $190,000 through the production and marketing branch, $3,200,000 covering irrigation and water storage projects in the western provinces and $498,693 relating to the administration of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act.
Coming as I do from an area with a keen interest in agriculture I invite the committee to examine the question of agriculture in balance. Since 1956 the price of products sold by farmers has increased by 5 per cent whereas the price of products bought by farmers and used in production increased by 12 per cent. The situation is even more grave in certain sectors of the agricultural industry.
Earlier today reference was made to butter and other dairy products. An extremely important dairy product is skimmed milk powder. With respect to this product which is vitally important to eastern farmers there has occurred a sharp drop in price from 1957. In 1957 the price of dry skimmed milk, first grade, f.o.b. Montreal was between 17 and 19 cents per pound and in 1961 the price was between 6 and 10 cents per pound.


John (Jack) McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. What has this to do with P.F.R.A.?


The Deputy Chairman:: I was just about to rise to ask the hon. member for Leeds to assist the Chair by relating what he is saying about skimmed milk to the item under consideration which has to do with irrigation and water storage projects in the western provinces.


John Ross Matheson: May I attempt to answer that, Mr. Chairman, by placing on the record the approximate prices paid by farmers for feedstuffs from the west, bagged, per ton, delivered London and Ottawa. The figures in tabulated form are as follows:
Dec. 15 Dec. 15
1960	1961
Oats-Western	No.	1	feed	..	$61.95	$67.80Barley-Western	No.	2	feed	54.83	62.75Bran	
50.86	55.50Shorts	
52.98	57.65
On the other hand there has been a drop of approximately $63,000 in the price supports for dairy products in the year 1960-61 compared with the previous year.
Supply-Agriculture
The eastern farmer has every sympathy for his farming brother in western Canada but it is important that some consideration be given to equalizing the position of the eastern and western farmer. The dairy farmer is in the position of having to meet rising costs with no significant increase in his return from the sale of his products. That is something which is frequently overlooked.


Mr. Pascoe:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make a few remarks under item 616. Other speakers have mentioned the benefit to communities from the deep well drilling program. At this time I merely wish to endorse their commendation of the program.
I regret that the Minister of Agriculture is still sick as a result of his strenuous efforts on behalf of the farmer because my first remarks were intended for him personally. I wished to pass on to him words of appreciation from farmers in my constituency and other farmers as well for the assistance given last fall by the community pasture division of P.F.R.A. I refer particularly to the prompt action taken last autumn to establish an emergency feeding program. An emergency community pasture was set up in my constituency at Craven, as was mentioned in his opening statement by the acting minister. I visited this feeding ground several times last fall and talked to farmers who had cattle inside the fences on the 1,000 acres of crown owned grass and hay land on the Valeport flats. It was quite a sight to see the great herd in one pasture, many hundreds of head all together, but made up of small numbers from many farms. There were considerable quantities of water and pasture feed in the marshlands.
There was also the emergency feeding by pellets. These pellets made from grain screenings and molasses provided a balanced diet for the cattle. The pellets plus the available pasture feed produced highly satisfactory results. The pellets contained 11 to 12 per cent protein and 15 to 20 per cent fibre. This pellet feeding was provided to the cattle owners at a cost of 10 cents a day for a cow and an additional 4 cents a day for a calf. This nominal charge did not nearly cover the cost of the pellets and I imagine much of the $100,000 in this supplementary estimate covers the extra cost to the government.
As I said, I visited the pasture grounds on several occasions last fall. The farmers were very appreciative of the government's emergency program. One cattle owner said the gov-erment assistance was a godsend. He explained that he had been right out of feed and his cattle were eating weeds in the ditches along the roads when the emergency feeding program was announced.

Supply-Agriculture
I know the farmers were rather proud of the showing their cattle made, which was observable by motorists driving along the highway. There were always a number of owners helping with the pellet feeding and generally keeping an eye on the whole herd. When the nights were dark enough to offer an inducement to old time cattle rustling with modern equipment such as trucks, the owners took turns standing watch.
On one occasion when I visited there, 15 or 20 farmers were working together inoculating all the animals. Everyone seemed to be having a good time except perhaps the animals when the needles got a bit blunt.


Gordon Campbell Chown: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. gentleman but I cannot relate the emergency program undertaken by the federal government during the drought to the item under consideration, which has more bearing on future projects involving water use and conservation, irrigation and so on.


James Ernest Pascoe: If I may say so, Mr. Chairman, this item mentions the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act program. This is part of the program. In any event, I am nearly finished, but I think the matter comes under this act, if I may say so.
One of the main benefits from the emergency pasture and the government's chief reason for this feeding program was that it prevented panic selling of stock when farm feed was not available. Preventing this panic selling served two purposes; it kept market prices firm and it kept farmers in the business of cattle raising by keeping at least part of their herds intact. As I said earlier, I am sorry that the Minister of Agriculture is not here so that I could pass on to him the thanks of the cattle owners. I also wish to thank him personally for acting on my representation to keep this pasture feeding program open longer than was first intended. If I may do so, I should like to draw something to the attention of my friend the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska. I believe he said several times that P.F.R.A. was started by a Liberal government.


Samuel Boulanger: No; I did not say that.


James Ernest Pascoe: If he had listened to the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, he would have heard that it was started by the Bennett government.


Samuel Boulanger: That is what I said.


James Ernest Pascoe: If I may do so, I should like to refer to a part that is actually under this item of irrigation. I should just like to call to the attention of the acting minister and, through him, to the attention of the P.F.R.A.

officials a proposal by a number of farmers in the Moose Jaw area to dam the river south of Moose Jaw for irrigation purposes.
I know the P.F.R.A. officials are quite conversant with this proposal. It has been drawn to their attention several times. I should just like to read again a resolution passed at a meeting of farmers with the Moose Jaw agricultural society. This resolution reads as follows:
This meeting goes on record as requesting a detailed survey of the Moose Jaw creek area with regard to the possibility for the construction of a dam or dams suitable to store water to irrigate for agricultural purposes.
I should just like to draw that resolution to the attention of the acting minister and I hope he passes it on to the P.F.R.A. officials.
(Translation):


Mr. Brassard (Lapointe):: Mr. Chairman, I should like first of all to point out to my colleague the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre (Mr. Pascoe) that the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger) never claimed credit for the Liberal party for putting into our statute books legislation on assistance to prairie farmers.
What he did say, if I can rely on my memory, was that such legislation had been adopted under the administration of the Right Hon. R. B. Bennett, but had been implemented by a Liberal administration. If the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot (Mr. Ricard) wants to contradict that statement, let him go ahead and do it. Talking about the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot, I must say that I listened most carefully to his remarks this afternoon, just like I did yesterday afternoon, and I believe he is actually the Solomon's judgment of the Conservative party in this house. I am not at all surprised that the Prime Minister selected him as an assistant.
He attacked my colleague from Drummond-Arthabaska who talked about the assistance to western farmers. My colleague from Drummond-Arthabaska spent a year in the west, in 1931, when he worked on an Alberta farm. I would not be a bit surprised if the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot had spent from five to six years in the west, from 1931 to 1937, since he seems to be talking with so much authority on the subject of western agriculture.
What I fail to understand of some Quebec members is that it is impossible to reach unanimity on any issue related to the common welfare of our province and the jurisdiction of the federal government. We have

seen many instances of members from different areas and different provinces who got together, regardless of their party affiliation, to claim not concessions but rights.
The farmers in our parts also have problems and we want to help them. We want the federal government to consider their problems and to solve them.
It is not a question of playing western farmers against eastern farmers. That vagary only exists in the mind of a Solomon like the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot, Mr. Chairman.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: The hon. member for Lapointe (Mr. Brassard) must have his show.


Augustin Brassard: Mr. Chairman, I am not at all surprised by the remarks and interruptions of the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot. It would appear that he has been brought into this world only to interrupt and talk from his seat, and that is why from time to time his interruptions sound pointless.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: That is why I have asked for the floor.


Augustin Brassard: Mr. Chairman, as I have the floor, I hope to be able to go on with my speech.


An hon. Member:: Carry on, Gus.


Augustin Brassard: Mr. Chairman, the representatives of western farmers are not to be blamed for rising in defence of their fellow citizens, because it is their duty to do so, and I hope they will keep on doing so. But what surprises me, for instance, is the fact that some Quebec Conservatives are rising up in defence of western farmers and are overlooking the problems of those in the east, from Quebec, Ontario, the maritimes and Newfoundland.
We are Canadians just as the others and we want to have what we are entitled to get; we are not asking for any favour.
When I make those remarks, I am thinking of Ontario, the maritimes and Newfoundland as much as of Quebec. That is what I should like my Quebec Conservative friends to understand.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Chairman, I am not surprised that the hon. member for Lapointe should have taken the floor to raise a storm in a tea cup.
Our hon. friends had a very bad day yesterday and they have to do something today to try and make the headlines.
What I am saying today-
26207-1-78J
Supply-Agriculture


Augustin Brassard: You are the one
who wants to make the headlines.


Samuel Boulanger: He has been brought up in the Union Nationale school.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Chairman, you have heard the hon. member who has just said that I want to make the headlines. I hope his interruption, as well as that of the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska, is being noted and will appear in Hansard, because some of those statements are missing from time to time these days.


Augustin Brassard: You usually say "the record".


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Take down all the interruptions.
Mr. Chairman, I only tried a moment ago to get all hon. members to co-operate and when the hon. member for Lapointe rises and twists my remarks, well, he is only using the choice method of the Liberal party-


Augustin Brassard: It means that we must not speak about the problems of eastern farmers.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: -that choice method-


Augustin Brassard: It means that we must not speak about the problems of eastern farmers.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: -which consists in trying to play the east against the west.
Mr. Chairman, you hear these interruptions.
To play the east against the west, that is what the hon. members opposite have tried to do in their 22 years of administration, and for the past four years they have tried more than ever because such is their method: divide and conquer.
Mr. Chairman, I am not surprised that the hon. member for Lapointe-in the guise of gentility, and usually assuming a look of innocence like a newborn babe-should act like that, because when he wants to sting or give a blow-


Mr. Tremblay:: That is when he is in the
house-


Augustin Brassard: You have been away for four years.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: -he does what he did a moment ago: he twists and distorts whatever we say.


Augustin Brassard: That is your brilliant interpretation.


Léonard-David Sweezey Tremblay: He does so when he is in the house.

Supply-Agriculture


Augustin Brassard: You have been away for four years now.
(Text):


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I am surprised at two things. One of them is the lack of vocal representation on behalf of the farmers of eastern Canada by their members. The second is the overabundance of apple polishing by members from western Canada. The charge is made today, and I think it is a justifiable one, that we as members of parliament should look at the estimates we are discussing in terms of what the government is doing and where it is going.
I am not particularly interested in the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre congratulating the minister on having done something for him personally. We are concerned with a program. I was given to understand that a great many of the abuses under P.F.A.A. had been done away with by the government, but that kind of apple polishing speech only indicates to me that the abuses have not been abolished and are coming back with a vengeance. I suggest that this is not what we want.
We should look at agriculture as a whole and I think we should be very surprised that a long range program instituted in the days of Bennett should apply only to three named provinces. Is this problem not a basic problem that affects all of Canada? Have some of the Conservative members not stood up and said that the long range program of their party and of the government is ARDA? Is ARDA not an extension of assistance to all the provinces and, if so, why has it taken so long to do something about it? In the pamphlet issued by the minister, which the hon. member for Timmins reminds me was issued to the public before the legislation was passed, there is this statement:
As a means of meeting the small farm problem the government has under consideration ways and means of improving the level of living of farmers on small farms by means of better land use, encouraging the formation of economic farm units.
The reference is to a statement by the Prime Minister as found in Hansard of August 30, 1958. On December 15, 1960, we passed legislation providing for the extension of these benefits to other areas of Canada. Can the farmers not legitimately ask the government why the benefits are not being extended to all Canadians? Why is western Canada alone benefiting? Is it not time that the Minister of Agriculture told the Canadian people why the legislation is not being extended to all parts of Canada? When ARDA was enacted the minister agreed, as I think every member of the house did, that ARDA was not going to be legislation for specific provinces but would apply to all agricultural provinces.

Let us not fool the Canadian people into thinking that this money is to solve the drought problem in western Canada last year. It is true that there is a little extra money and it is quite true that there have been a few more wells drilled but this legislation has been on the statute books of Canada for many years, in good years and in bad. Is it not true that western farmers are as well able to look after their ups and downs as well as other farmers are? If it is, then the pamphlet that was issued to sell ARDA is not correct. It is pointed out in the pamphlet that in the province of Saskatchewan, for instance, only 4 per cent of the farmers had annual production under $1,200 in value.


Mr. Jones:: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, we are not on the ARDA program. There is no such item in these estimates.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, this is not the ARDA program. I am reading from the pamphlet that was issued before the ARDA program was instituted. It illustrates what is needed in western Canada, and I can well understand the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs raising a point of order because here is an indication that in Saskatchewan only 4 per cent of its population had an annual income under $1,200 a year. In the province of Quebec the figure is 28 per cent.
We have absolutely no objection to and have always supported programs for western Canada. We are simply asking now that some of the western members be good enough to help some of us in the east to do for the rest of Canada what we are willing to do for them. We have provided the machinery that has made it possible, along with good government in Saskatchewan, for the people of that province to have better incomes than in any other agricultural province in Canada. The province of Quebec is one of the worst off in this regard and their problems are connected mainly with the dairy industry. All I am saying is that we should give the same kind of assistance to them and it can be provided under exactly the same kind of items as we are discussing today.
In my area there are thousands of acres of cleared grassland on which the farmers are not bothering to grow hay because they cannot sell it. We would like to have community pastures. We would like the government to come to us and say that they will feed our dairy cows for 10 cents a day and our calves for 4 cents a day. They are paying for this in the large area of western Canada affected by drought and are able to do it for $100,000. I think that the government is to be congratulated if this is the case, but I think the minister is under obligation to tell

us how much of the money went into the subsidy to pay for the pellets which the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre suggested were provided out of the $100,000.
I am only suggesting that if this is a good thing for the farmers of western Canada then let us not have it only in the years when there is drought. Any beef producer will tell you that if you can feed a cow for 10 cents a day you are doing exceptionally well. In fact, if you can keep a herd alive in my part of the country for 10 cents a head you are doing very well. I should like to know why this subsidy is not being provided under this program in my part of Canada and in the rest of the country. I think the government has an obligation to tell us what part of the subsidy came from the added amount for which we are now asked in this supplementary estimate.
The Conservative members from eastern Canada must be aware of the situation. I know that many of them are connected with the dairy industry, which is in very serious straits. Many Conservative members are concerned with the production of beef, poultry or swine and I am surprised that they have not asked that what is being done to help the farmers of western Canada should be extended to the rest of Canada. Good heavens, Mr. Chairman, surely we do not ask for legislation just to elect a large number of members from western Canada but rather for legislation which applies to all of Canada, which is good for all of Canada and which assists the agricultural industry to operate in the most effective and efficient way and to get the most out of the natural resource being used. If there is anything else being done under these provisions I think we should find out about it now. While the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs does not want to talk about ARDA, I thinly this would be a very good time for farmers all across Canada-


Henry Frank Jones: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I did not say that I did not want to talk about ARDA. ARDA is a very great program and I am willing to talk about it for hours and hours because it is a wonderful thing for agriculture in this country. However, I did draw the chairman's attention to the fact that under this item the remarks of the hon. member in talking about ARDA were not in order, and that is my position.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I am not going to take the time of the committee, but if hon. members will read this pamphlet I am sure they will find that every problem we are discussing now will be solved if ARDA is
Supply-Agriculture
implemented and is made 100 per cent effective. There will be no need for the legislation we are talking about now if this pamphlet is correct in its presentation of the problem.


John (Jack) McIntosh: I just want to ask the minister one question. The trend in the past has been for officials of the P.F.R.A. to concentrate their efforts on larger projects such as the south Saskatchewan dam and neglect the smaller projects. I wonder if the minister could give us some assurance that this same pattern will not continue in the future?


John Angus MacLean: To answer the last question first, I should like to say that there were almost 9,000 small projects undertaken in the past fiscal year, about double the average in the past.
I should like to answer some specific questions that have been asked of me. The hon. member for Vancouver East asked me about the construction program for the Saskatchewan dam. The completion date is 1965 and the program is now on schedule. It was a little behind, but as a result of the excellent construction weather that existed during this fiscal year, the program is now back on schedule. Under the terms of the agreement it is the responsibility of the Saskatchewan government to develop the areas to be irrigated, and the Saskatchewan government has such a program under way at the moment to ascertain which areas are most suitable.
The hon. member for Okanagan Boundary, I think it was, put a question to me as to whether or not a meeting had yet been held in connection with the Agricultural Rehabilitation and Development Act. I think his question was out of order, Mr. Chairman, but perhaps you will bear with me if I answer it. I can tell the committee that the director has met with the officials of the provinces and programs to be undertaken under this act are now being evolved. This act will allow the type of work that is now being done in the particular area to which this item applies, and will allow this type of water conservation work to be done in co-operation with the provinces in other parts of Canada.
The hon. member for Drummond-Artha-baska asked me if P.F.R.A. would be extended to the whole of Canada. I cannot speak for the government on that matter, but I should like to point out to him that the same type of work that is now being undertaken under this measure can be undertaken under ARDA.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Finance

[Stage Direction]
630.	To authorize the establishment of a special account in the consolidated revenue fund to be called the peace treaty claims (Japan) settlement account, to which shall be credited all amounts received from Japan by way of settlement of its obligations under article 18 (a) of the treaty of peace between Canada and Japan that was signed at San Francisco on the 8th of September, 1951, and, notwithstanding section 35 of the Financial Administration Act, to authorize payments out of the said account in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with the peace treaty claims (Japan) settlement regulations established by order in council P.C. 1961-1850 of the 22nd day of December, 1961, in respect of claims and in respect of expenses incurred in investigating and reporting on such claims and to authorize the repayment out of the peace treaty claims (Japan) settlement account of all amounts that have been paid out toward such expenses under the authority of this or any other Appropriation Act, $1.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Just a moment, Mr. Chairman, you are going rather rapidly. I should like to ask the minister if he can say whether or not this vote would have anything to do with the compensation being paid to the Hong Kong veterans, either in respect of their period of imprisonment or as compensation for forced labour. Perhaps I can take just one or two sentences to elaborate upon what I have in mind. As I understand it, and I must confess to the parliamentary secretary that I have not got the documents with me that I hoped to have when I rose to say a word about this subject and I am just relying on memory, we did make provision out of the war claims fund for these veterans on a basis roughly comparable to that of the United States so far as compensation for maltreatment of these prisoners during their period of imprisonment is concerned. However, I believe the United States also gave a forced labour award which we have not given.
I believe there was some problem at that time as to whether or not there would be adequate funds. As I understand it, some of the Hong Kong veterans feel that there were, in fact, adequate funds to give an award comparable to the United States award. I do not believe the question is closed. I would not want anyone to think I was seeking to say anything controversial or critical in any way. I am simply seeking to elucidate a question and get a little information. If the parliamentary secretary can give me a little information, I know that there are a number of Hong Kong veterans who will be interested in it.


Mr. Bell (Carleton):: This particular item does not relate to the problem which the hon. gentleman has just raised. Actually, this item arises out of paragraph 18(a) of the treaty of peace with Japan and deals entirely with claims arising out of the Sino-Japanese war
[Mr. MacLean (Queens) -1
of 1937-41. It involves, actually, quite a small sum of money which was received in September of 1961, a lump sum settlement of some $17,500, United States, which then being converted, provided $18,025, Canadian. This amount is available for distribution to a small number of claimants who suffered as a result of the Sino-Japanese war. The Minister of Finance has been authorized to retain an adviser in relation to the disbursement of that fund, and has retained Mr. Justice Hyndman, whose experience is pre-eminent in this field and for whose wisdom and judgment my hon. friend from Bonavista-Twillingate has as high a regard as I have.
The particular matter to which my hon. friend refers does not come under this particular item. He has referred, I think, to the forced labour award for prisoners of war resulting from the Hong Kong situation. This was referred in the first instance, as I recollect, to the Right Hon. J. L. Ilsley, now chief justice of Nova Scotia, who associated it with an award for maltreatment-I am speaking now from memory-of $1 per day. When there was some money in the fund, the war claims fund, then this government raised the amount I think to $1.50. The matter was referred again to the chairman of the war claims commission, Chief Justice Campbell of the province of Prince Edward Island, who reiterated the Ilsley award. I can only say to my hon. friend that the amount which remains in the fund is now only $67,534.35. The final report of the war claims commission has not been presented, and beyond that at this stage I cannot go.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I thank the parliamentary secretary for being so generous, because the point I have raised is not directly connected with the item. I would ask him, if I may be permitted just to shade on the edge of the rules in so doing, whether he would assure me that the representations I have received will receive careful consideration if I pass them on to him.


Richard Albert Bell: Mr. Chairman, the representations my hon. friend makes always receive careful consideration.


Chesley William Carter: Mr. Chairman, I just wish to make sure that the only amount that is going to be in this fund when it is set up is $17,500.


Richard Albert Bell: Seventeen thousand five hundred United States dollars. It was paid in United States dollars, and worked out to $18,025 Canadian.


Chesley William Carter: The balance in the war claims commission will not be transferred to this fund?


Mr. Bell (Carlelon):: No, not at all; they are quite separate funds.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General items of payroll costs including superannuation payments-
631.	Government's contribution to the hospital insurance (outside Canada) plan-further amount required and to authorize the treasury board to make regulations to extend the scope of the plan established pursuant to vote 668 of the Appropriation Act No. 5, 1958, to include members of the regular forces in such circumstances and for such periods as the regulations prescribe, $90,000.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Could the parliamentary secretary just tell us the reason for this vote.


Thomas Miller Bell: This vote is for an extension of what is an important hospital insurance principle for Canadian government employees and their dependants who are stationed abroad. It is for the foreign service and affects a total of 8,700 people. The position was that by a vote in 1958 treasury board was authorized to make regulations providing for hospital insurance for Canadian government employees and their dependants abroad, for dependants of the R.C.M.P. abroad, and dependants of the armed forces.
That was extended by the Appropriation Act of 1960 so that it would cover service subsequent to returning to Canada until these employees or their dependants could pick up the provincial plans. The basis of contribution is that which an employee would make were he resident in Ontario. In other words, this plan for federal employees is based upon the Ontario hospital insurance scheme. This particular supplementary estimate is to cover additional costs due to a considerable expansion that has occurred in the membership and the use of this plan since the preparation of the main estimates for the year.
In addition to the extension of the scope of the plan additional moneys are required so that members of the forces will not be without hospital insurance coverage while on certain types of leave without pay, or while qualified for coverage under a provincial plan having been released from the service immediately prior to or upon their return from a posting outside Canada. The amount previously voted was $130,000; this vote is $90,000, making a total of $220,000 for this purpose during the year.


Mr. Benidickson:: Mr. Chairman, if the committee looks at the language of the vote it will perhaps realize that we are again carrying on this business of legislating under the estimates rather than by amendment of an act. The former member for Winnipeg North Centre has elaborated on this argument and I am not going to repeat it. Of course, his criticism in those days was directed to the
Supply-Finance
former government. There may be good reason for us to look at this type of thing, because in vote 631 the committee will see that we are authorizing not only the expenditure of $90,000 but we are authorizing treasury board, which is a small committee of the cabinet, to make regulations to extend the scope of the plan. We do not even know what regulations are likely to be made by treasury board.
I hope the parliamentary secretary will tell us what the plan is and what is going to be recommended by the Department of Finance- which is in charge of this particular item- to treasury board, if they have not made regulations already. Of course he cannot guarantee that they will accept his minster's proposals, but at least we in committee of supply should be informed as to what he thinks his minister is going to recommend to treasury board.


Thomas Miller Bell: The regulations that already exist are of course a matter of public record and have been laid upon the table of the house. My hon. friend from Kenora-Rainy River has commented upon the general procedure of legislation in the estimates. I have in another place at another time expressed certain views with relation to that matter. They are a matter of public record and I think I shall have to be content to let that record stand.
My hon. friend asks what will be the recommendation in relation to the amendments to the regulations which are dated November 24, 1960. I can only say that they will be for the purpose of expanding the existing regulations so that coverage will be provided for certain members of the armed forces while they are on leave without pay, or for certain members of the armed forces and employees of the government of Canada to pick up this insurance coverage prior to their leaving for service abroad.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I wish to ask the parliamentary secretary whether this covers the problem where on occasion a member of the armed forces may be on leave and is killed. Is there an insurance policy of that nature attached to the hospitalization plan?


Richard Albert Bell: No, this covers the question of hospital insurance exclusively. It has nothing to do with what may be the insurance feature in relation to the man's service in the armed forces.


William Moore Benidickson: The parliamentary secretary indicated that with respect to regulations for employees of the government of Canada serving outside Canada the government was

Supply-Finance
using the Ontario scheme. Is Ontario as generous as other provinces in this country? I do not think Ontario is the most generous; I think they have been very niggardly in the administration of some of their petty regulations in connection with the cost-sharing program. I know that Ontario has the largest population and, of course, has one of the oldest provincial governments.
Why do we rely upon Ontario as our standard for what might be made available to employees of the crown serving outside Canada, particularly when in an administrative way I think Ontario has not been very generous in these welfare measures, including this particular one of hospital insurance.


Richard Albert Bell: Mr. Chairman, my hon. friend surprises me greatly when he suggests that the Ontario plan is in any way niggardly. My personal impression is that it is the very reverse. I have had opportunity during the last two or three years to take advantage of the Ontario plan, and I must say I have felt it was a most generous plan in all particulars.
I am not in a position before the committee today to make a comparison between the amount an employee of the federal government might receive in one province as against another. 1 can only say to my hon. friend that it would not be feasible to have ten separate plans operating and use the residence or domicile of the individual. The only reason the Ontario plan is chosen, I think, is that the national capital is located in Ontario and it is thereby the most convenient plan to adopt. I am sure that all those who benefit by this plan are quite satisfied that they are receiving generous treatment.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is one respect in which the Ontario plan is much less satisfactory than that of the other provinces. I refer to the fact that it does not cover the whole population. In British Columbia, for example, there is a sales tax and everybody is covered by hospital insurance. In Ontario it is true that all people employed for wages are covered, but self employed people are not all covered.


William Moore Benidickson: Only there are more than eight people in the firm.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps this is not the proper occasion on which to make this observation, but I believe that there is no more inefficient bureaucracy that I have discovered than the Ontario hospital insurance commission. I say that out of personal knowledge of a number of cases. They can take a good many lessons from the department of health and welfare here on how to organize a service properly. It may be that taking Ontario as

a model has no effect upon people overseas, and it may be I am using this committee as a forum for the expression of a grievance that I ought to get my member to express in the Ontario legislature. But my member in the Ontario legislature represents the riding of Russell and he seems to be otherwise preoccupied these days. You will understand me, sir.
Another question I wish to ask is this. The provision here refers to persons outside Canada, I take it, and it covers the period after their return to Canada before they would be dealt with under the operation of a provincial scheme. I think that in some provinces they would be covered as soon as they came back. In Ontario, as another of their little tricks, they deprive them of coverage for some time. But what I am trying to find out is this: does the federal government have any similar provision for any of its employees in Canada, or is this intended just to cover those who are not covered by any provincial scheme? For example, what about employees in the territories?


Thomas Miller Bell: This particular vote relates only to employees and their dependants abroad, or to dependants of members of the forces. With reference to the situation of employees in Canada, they will insure themselves under the various provincial schemes. I do have a recollection that there is a territorial scheme in existence both for the Yukon and the Northwest Territories. I am speaking from recollection only, but I believe the territories have arrangements similar to the provinces.
The federal government has in the last two or three years provided, on a generous basis, a group medical and surgical scheme which is an outstanding type of group scheme, though, of course, it does not involve the hospital arrangements we are discussing here.
As to the hon. gentleman's last remarks I can only say that my experience of the Ontario scheme has been very different from that which he has represented to the committee. I have found the Ontario scheme most satisfactory and most generous.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
632.	To authorize persons who were contributors under the Civil Service Superannuation Act immediately prior to the 1st day of January. 1954, and who became contributors under the Public Service Superannuation Act on that date, who failed to elect under subsection (5) of section 25 of the said act before the 1st day of January, 1955, to elect, in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the governor in council, to count service that would have been countable by them under the said section if they had not so failed to elect, and to deem such election to be valid for all purposes of the said act, $1.
William Arnold Peters: Can the minister tell us how many people are involved in this vote?


Richard Albert Bell: One.


Mr. Caron:: I shall try to ask my question in English, so you will not need that thing in your ear. Does this provision mean that those who did not take advantage of the law of 1954 can now take advantage of it?


Richard Albert Bell: This is confined entirely to those persons who failed to elect under subsection 5 of section 25 of the act. This is an election having to do with the defence services pension fund. In reply to the hon. member for Timiskaming I said one person was involved. We are only aware of one. There may be others-there may turn out to be others-but it is thought unlikely.


Alexis Pierre Caron: There is one dollar provided because you think you have sufficient funds to look after this in the regular administration?


Richard Albert Bell: Yes, funds are available because of contributions which were made for this purpose by the individual concerned in the belief he was in the public service superannuation fund. This simply gives the power to elect.


Alexis Pierre Caron: And if anybody else comes along they would be accepted under the same principle?


Richard Albert Bell: If there is someone who comes under subsection 5 of section 25 of the act.


William Moore Benidickson: The parliamentary secretary says that up to the present time he has knowledge of only one individual whose case is being advanced as an argument to justify an amendment which is, again, being done here by means of an item in the estimates. He indicates that the employee was employed by the department of defence.
The hon. gentleman will have read the report of the Auditor General with respect to a number of superannuation items. Would he take this opportunity to indicate to what extent he is aware of steps taken in his department to tighten up the situation with respect to some of these practices which have been drawn to the attention of the public and to the attention of members of parliament by the Auditor General? After all, it is the Department of Finance which is responsible for the provision of superannuation in respect not only of civilians but of people formerly employed in the armed forces. It seems obvious that senior persons in the employ of the government have been soft in connection with placing former employees on retirement on a basis which would not normally prevail in private business. The
Supply-Finance
cost of retiring an unsatisfactory employee on pension has, as the Auditor General has pointed out, been most expensive to the taxpayer.


Richard Albert Bell: I think I should point out that if I were to undertake to go into that question on this particular item I should be carried very far from the vote itself and the discussion would soon be completely out of order. The hon. member and I will, I am sure, meet in another forum, namely the public accounts committee, where this matter will be discussed in detail. At that time we shall have witnesses before us and we shall be in a position to discuss the question on the basis of the information disclosed. I have not brought with me today the details of the Auditor General's report or the other facts of the cases mentioned because I did not think they were relevant to this item, which is a very confined one.


William Moore Benidickson: Has the parliamentary secretary the authority to assure me that we are likely to have the normal sittings of the public accounts committee to review, as we would in a normal year, the various recommendations of the Auditor General paragraph by paragraph?


Richard Albert Bell: I have no knowledge which the hon. gentleman does not have, but I would draw his attention to items 13 and 14 of today's order paper which indicate that there are to be references to that committee.


William Moore Benidickson: It could be a smokescreen.


Richard Albert Bell: All I can say is that when the house refers those items to the public accounts committee, that very good committee will do its duty as it always has.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
633.	Contribution to the New Brunswick disaster fund, $50,000.
Chesley William Carter: Mr. Chairman, I wish to commend the government for this item. Perhaps I may be permitted to take a moment or two to say that this item seems to me to point up the need of a permanent fund of this kind to provide relief for our fishermen who so often have to suffer disaster. We all have poignant memories of the disaster for which this contribution is being made. A year before that there was a disaster in my own riding in which a dragger was lost with all hands as a result of which 14 families were left penniless. Only yesterday a storm occurred resulting in a loss of considerable property belonging to fishermen.

Supply-Finance
As far as I know no lives were lost but even the loss or destruction of property can be a disaster.
I wish to ask the government to give consideration to establishing a permanent disaster fund for fishermen. The minister pointed out some time ago that fishermen do not have too much in common with farmers. However, the farmer can always go to bed and sleep safe and sound every night but the fisherman risks his life every time he goes out to earn his living. I believe special consideration should be given the fishermen in view of that fact.
We have had ample evidence in recent years of the disasters which our fishermen and fishing communities have to suffer. I urge the government to give consideration to establishing a special disaster fund for fishermen.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
634.	Grant to 1'association des universities de langue frangaise to assist in defraying the expenses of the first world congress of French language universities held in Canada in 1961, $15,000.
(Translation):
Mr. Dorion:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words about this item whose purpose is to pay a grant to the association des universites de langue frangaise. It will assist this organization in defraying the expense of the first world congress of French language universities which was held in Montreal from September 9 to 13, 1961.
I should like to point out right now that this item comes under the government's program designed to foster the expansion, throughout the world, of the French culture, to which six million Canadians belong, in the same way as the federal government already promotes the cultural development of commonwealth countries.
The congress I mentioned was an essentially international event, because it brought together representatives from 37 universities where teaching is done exclusively or mostly in French. In addition, the governments of the ten states made it a point to be represented by observers, high officials of the national education or foreign affairs departments. Two countries even sent their minister of national education.
At the end of the conference, the participants established an organization which ensures close contact between the Frenchspeaking universities of the world and which will take the necessary steps and carry out proper investigations and research on their behalf.

The organization is known as AUPELF that is the association des universites en-tierement ou partiellement de langue fran-caise. Its board is composed of Msgr. Irenee Lussier, rector of Montreal University, chairman; Mr. Marcel Bouchard, rector of the University of Dijon, France and Mr. Mohammed El Fasi, rector of the Moroccan Universities, vice-chairmen. The members come in particular from Lille, France; Algiers; Liege, Belgium; Dakar, Senegal; Leopoldville, Congo; and Tananarive, Madagascar.
The fact that these members, who have chosen a Canadian as chairman of their association, come from such widely scattered places clearly indicates the international character of such a meeting and the worldwide importance of the role our Frenchspeaking universities are called upon to play.
In this respect, I hasten to remind the house that Mr. Andre Bachand, who has recently been appointed assistant to the rector of the University of Montreal, played a major part in the organization of the convention. I take this opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to congratulate Mr. Bachand for the work he has done on this occasion, as director of public relations at his university, and to congratulate him also on his recent appointment to his important post. The many members of this house who have had the pleasure of meeting him appreciate his courtesy and competence. They will join with me, I am sure, in wishing him every success.
May I also associate with these congratulations Mr. Jean Marc Leger, editorial writer of he Devoir. The success of the convention is largely due to him. On that particular occasion, he substantially contributed to the renown of Canada abroad.
In passing this item 634, the committee will acknowledge the advisability of giving aid to AUPELF whose work, let us not forget, will benefit many Canadians since this organization will stimulate co-operation between Canada and foreign countries through the exchange of professors, scholarships and courses for students and scholars, as well as through the exchange of textbooks and reference and scientific works.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, I wish to add my voice to that of the Secretary of State (Mr. Dorion).
He is very pleased that 1'association des universites de langue frangaise chose to hold its first convention in Canada. This adds to the importance, not only of the French culture in Canada, but also to our French Canadian universities.

I am sure all the members will be pleased to approve this additional amount, for everyone to know that in Canada, the Englishspeaking as well as the French-speaking Canadians gladly unite in order to assist association des universites de langue fran-gaise to go on in its efforts to make known throughout the world the French culture which is particularly appreciated by those who have taken the trouble to get acquainted with it.
I associate myself wholeheartedly with the Secretary of State in support of the item we are asked to vote on.
(Text):


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I rise on behalf of this group to express our complete support for this estimate. I am sorry I must confine my remarks to English on this occasion as my French is not as good as the Prime Minister's. However, I want the committee to know we consider this a worthwhile move and are proud to be associated with any estimate that leads to a further development in understanding of the great French culture.


William Moore Benidickson: Hon. members will realize this amount refers to a conference already held. We all appreciate the honour that was given Canada when this country was chosen as the site of the first conference of the French language universities association.
I wish to ask the parliamentary secretary for information. We are now voting what appears to be an additional $15,000 of a grant which may have been $65,000 in the basic estimate for 1961-62. Am I correct in my understanding?


Richard Albert Bell: I am afraid 1 do not understand the hon. gentleman.


William Moore Benidickson: In the first column of the document before us we are asked to vote $15,000. The second column refers to an amount of $65,000. The third item, of course, is the total for the department. Have we previously granted something under this vote?


Richard Albert Bell: No, not for this purpose. The amount involved there, I believe, is the total budget for all purposes. The $15,000 is the amount of the federal contribution.
(Translation):


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, as an English-speaking Canadian, who has a strong desire to be bilingual but who fears that he will never manage it, I am happy to support the views expressed by the Secretary of State (Mr. Dorion), the hon. member for Hull (Mr. Caron) and the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge).
(Text):


Richard Albert Bell: May I correct the
Supply-Forestry
answer I gave to the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River in respect of the amount of $65,000. That actually is approximately the total budget of the organization. I looked in my notes and thought that was what was involved there. If my hon. friend will look at the heading "special" he will see that it covers $50,000 for the New Brunswick disaster fund and $15,000 for this. The total is $65,000 in the second column.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY Forest research branch-
635.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $80,000.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I intend to be quite brief. The members of this group cannot resist having a few words to say on such an important estimate, one of $80,000 for additional costs in connection with the forest research branch, inasmuch as we realize how important this work is to the welfare of the present and future generations. The only thing we regret is that more is not spent on forest research. When you study the budgets of European nations and some other nations and consider the great importance of the forest industry to Canada, we are still not spending nearly sufficient on forest research if the work required is to be done. Before proceeding I wish to thank the minister for his courtesy whenever I have sought information or asked for bulletins or literature or things of that sort which are within the range of his department. I appreciate that courtesy and I appreciate also the minister's woodsy feel. You can be a technician; you can know the scientific aspects of forestry; but if you have not the woodsy feel-and it is something you acquire by living in the forests and being associated with the industry-you do not understand the problems as well.
I intend to have more to say on the main estimates. However, the importance of this work is not understood by many members of the house. I was just glancing roughly through the annual report for 1960-61 and I noticed that this branch is undertaking work in silviculture and management, mensuration-which is a very important subject, changing the techniques from one type of scale to another -tree improvement, tree biology, forest and forest land, forest inventories research and forest fire research. AU these activities require greater funds than have been available in the past if the work is to be undertaken satisfactorily, and in time to produce the results which are, shall I say required or necessary for the practical application of the recommendations derived from the studies in some cases.

Supply-Forestry
I rise at this time, particularly to draw attention to one aspect of forest research or the direction in which forest research can be applied. I wish to refer particularly to the work of the Canadian tree farmers associations. I urge the government to give that at present small organization, but one growing in importance, every possible assistance and encouragement. It is a socially responsible and desirable form of free enterprise as it is composed of persons who are aiming to accept their responsibilities to present and future generations by making certain that we conserve and develop our forest resources to the greatest advantage.
It is marvellous field for young people to enter if they wish to have a co-operative attitude toward life and yet have the opportunity to give expression to personal initiative and personal application of their abilities and energy. I therefore urge every consideration for this organization. Its main purposes are to promote the conservation and the development of forest resources through the ownership of woodlots and tree farms by individuals, small corporations and so on.
I wish to bring to the attention of the committee and the minister briefly the rec-commendations made by this organization to the resources for tomorrow conference, as they were the result of numerous meetings on the part of the directors in association with other persons who have been interested in this field. I might say that this forest industry is my life blood; I have lived my whole life in it. The recommendations are as follows:
(1)	An extension forester must be available eventually for every 100,000 to 200,000 acres of tree farm land and woodlots.
There is a connecting link between the tree farmer or wood lot farmer and the research facilities that are available.
(2)	In general to encourage competent tree farmers to remain in all areas of general marginal and submarginal food producing land and to encourage these tree farmers to hold or obtain adequate acreage to support a healthy tree farming activity in all such communities.
That is where a good deal of research is required in order to find out different types of land that are suitable for this purpose, and species that are less suitable. It is a splendid field for young people from rural communities, particularly if it is allied with farming or other rural activities. Then they go on to say this:
Complete desertion of these areas would result in less intensive tree farming in the entire area because of the alternative, less economical, less intensive operation possible by public ownership.
I agree with that statement, on that scale, They continue:

We must not adopt a policy in Canada that would unwittingly have the effect of creating collective, publicly owned farms of the type in Russia.
Then the next recommendation is as follows:
(3)	Availability of loans on long term at low interest rates to encourage and aid the independent tree farmer during a period of as much as 25 years to establish an efficient, productive, high yield tree farm.
I might say that 50 years ago I bought some land upon which nothing was growing but ferns, willow herb and willows. Now I have on that property white pine, 2 feet in diameter and as much as 100 feet in height. It is particularly good growing land, but it shows what can be done in one lifetime. From the point of view of the average Canadian where our forest resources have been so readily available, we have not acquired to any great extent to date that long term view or that willingness to plant at the present time for the benefit of future generations, which prevails to a much greater extent in Great Britain and in European countries. I remember that when the Duke of Buccleuch was here he told me what he had done on his estates since the war. To give him credit, may I say that his family has a sense of responsibility to the state and a responsibility to future generations. One hundred and ten thousand acres of his estate were overcut and in a sense destroyed because of the necessity to supply pit props for war production in the second world war. I forget when it was that he was here, but I think it was about four years ago. At that time he told me at the family's own expense they had replanted 77,000 acres. How many corporations have done that in Canada in the same period since the second world war, corporations that have no timber because in days past they destroyed the forest by their methods of logging and so on. I admit that those practices are changing and improving. However, I see a great future for the forest industry in rural communities. I am speaking on this item in view of the necessity of extending forest research because there are millions of acres in Canada which can be brought into production for the benefit of future generations and, with proper and selective cutting, can provide some income for the present generation. The association goes on to recommend:
4. Vocational training of tree farmers in the technical features of growing, harvesting and marketing of wood as a crop. This will be a form of adult education and may be copied from the Danish folk schools.
I might say, Mr. Chairman, that I have read a good deal about their practices, and I bring this to the attention of the Minister of Labour who I see is listening to what I have to say.

This is a type of vocational training that has not been undertaken to date and one that can be applied very successfully in a good many areas of Canada if you can get the cooperation of the local forest industry, the local educational authorities and local farmers' and other organizations. There is an opportunity here for the training of these people along vocational lines so that they will have the knowledge that will place them between the scientifically trained forest engineer and the person who works in the woods without knowledge of what he is doing. This is the next recommendation of the association.
5. The federal and provincial governments can assist our association greatly in carrying out its programs for local groups of woodlot owners by making available technical information on each of these programs and providing media for demonstrating this information to farmers at meetings. This could be the basis of the vocational adult education program. Macdonald college and other colleges have similar types of programs and others are needed.
I think these programs can be fitted into vocational schools. I am very glad to see that a vocational school is going to be erected in the city of Nelson as a result of the cooperation of the federal and provincial governments. Here is an ideal centre. As you know, Mr. Chairman, in my constituency alone last year there were over 300 million board feet of lumber cut and I believe it is estimated that up to 400 million board feet of lumber a year can be harvested in perpetuity by selective cutting. When you think of that vast and perpetual production and the increasing necessity for skills and for understanding in the industry and the increasing part that tree farmers or woodlot owners, whichever you like to call them, can play, one can see that there is a tremendous opportunity here.
In British Columbia the tree farms are largely huge areas that are leased by the large corporations from the provincial government. When I speak of tree farmers I am speaking of those who have anything from 100 to 5,000 acres of timber which they are operating on a perpetual yield basis. I should like to suggest that in establishing vocational schools the Department of Forestry would be very wise to get in touch with the industry and enter into consultation with all those people who have a knowledge of forestry and forest research including departmental officials and the local institutions in the area it is intended to serve. We can establish these vocational training schools for the management of tree farms or woodlots, and we have a lot of marginal land which will provide an opportunity to arrest the drift, shall I say,
Supply-Forestry
toward the entire destruction of what I term socially responsible and socially desirable free enterprise.
In the district in which I have spent the greater part of my life and which is a forested area, the harvesting of timber is largely carried on at present by three corporations. Yet there is a tremendous opportunity for the use of marginal lands with co-operation between the federal and provincial governments in making possible the purchase of forested land for tree farm purposes, the promotion of tree farming and the provision of opportunities for literally thousands of persons to have independent, happy and fruitful lives by the practice of this occupation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, if I may say a few words following the spokesman of the free enterprisers and the dukes, I should like to say that I too cannot find it in my heart to suggest that we should not vote at least this additional sum for the purpose for which it is requested, that of forestry research. I wish to make a special appeal, and the minister will understand readily why I am doing so, for the intensification of research into two particular aspects of forestry. After all, our forests provide the biggest and most valuable crop in Canada, a fact that is sometimes forgotten, and it seems to me that we lose a great deal of that crop every year by fire. This was particularly brought to our attention, of course, by the forest fires in Newfoundland last summer.
It seems to me there are two kinds of research that could very well be intensified. The first is research into better and also cheaper methods of fighting fires because, as I discovered, fighting fires is not a job for enthusiastic amateurs. To be done successfully it has got to be done by people who know how.
It is true, of course, that forest fires are not always a total disaster, that there are times when forests benefit from being burned, but in most cases it is desirable to arrest these fires at a very early stage. I recognize that in this field most of the responsibility rests with the provinces, but the federal government can certainly do a good deal in two directions, first, by the co-ordination of efforts and perhaps the establishment of a strategic reserve of firefighters and, second, by research into better methods of fire fighting.
There is another aspect of this subject which it seems to me also deserves constant study, that of salvage after a fire has taken place. We know that in most cases these fires do not destroy everything and that a great deal can be salvaged if the right methods are used. A great deal can also be done if

Supply-Forestry
the right methods are used to promote the healthy development of new forests where fires have taken place. Perhaps because my own constituency was more adversely affected by forest fires last year than any other single constituency in Canada, the matter is possibly more in my mind than it is in the minds of some of the other hon. members at the present time. The minister came down himself to see what was happening at the very height of our difficulties last summer and I am sure I am addressing a minister who is very sympathetic. The minister, like the hon. member for Kootenay West, is familiar with the lumber business and, if I may say so modestly, I too have some knowledge because actually I was in the lumber business before I was 15 years of age. So that it is not just something in which I have taken an interest since I became a member of parliament. I feel that I am speaking to someone who is thoroughly sympathetic when I make this plea for intensification of this aspect of research, not that it is more important than the other aspect but because it is a field in which there is still a great deal to be learned, as is the case in every branch of the industry.
We do know that there is increasing competitiveness with woods products from products of some of our resources that are not renewable like the forests, and it is tremendously in the national interest to keep our forest products competitive in every way with other products, and not merely to keep up the supply but to increase the supply as the years go by because the demand will inevitably increase.
(Translation) :


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, I am quite willing to associate myself with the hon. members for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) and for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge), the latter being the most capitalistic of socialists, to say that there is certainly-I said socialist capitalist-and in order to join in their praise of the Minister of Forestry (Mr. Flemming).
The effort to instil into the public the importance of our future forests, and the forestry work to help the provinces were needed and called for.
I have been told, though I am no expert in this matter, that the minister is doing a remarkable job for which he deserves to be commended.
Earlier today I heard the hon. member for Kootenay West tell us that he once planted trees that are now 135 feet high, and measuring several feet around the base.

As far as I am concerned, in 1942 I went into the bush to fetch two spruce trees which I took home and planted in front of my house. I looked after them, 1 saw to it that they were not broken, and, today, those trees have reached a height of about 35 feet, and a diameter of about 12 inches above the roots, whereby, that means if someone, even without being an expert in the matter, makes an effort to study the question, he finally loves all that beautifies the surroundings of his home.
In 1936, we made a test in Hull. We obtained from the provincial government of Quebec, for the junior chamber of commerce of the city of Hull, 1,200 maple trees which were transplanted in that city. Unfortunately that work had not been preceded by a period of education and preparation of our school children. Those 1,200 maple trees were planted but, unfortunately, there are only three or four left today, because they were broken by the school children who ran and played around them, not being used to such means of adornment and embellishment in our cities. Thus the city of Hull was deprived of a desirable improvement because one of those maple trees planted near my place has now reached about 100 feet in height and a diameter of some 18 to 22 inches at the butt. If we had first of all had our school children fully understand the value and beauty of trees, they would have protected them and today our city would be so much the nicer with 1,200 fine trees.
Therefore, I would ask the minister to enter into an agreement with the departments of education of the various provinces in order that an educational program be implemented to instil into our children and our young people the beauty of a tree and its value around private homes, and in the forest.
I do not believe the minister will refuse to consider that matter which in my opinion is of the utmost importance because the growing generation is not adequately prepared in that field.
When the Department of Forestry was created some time ago, we complained that the minister had not appointed a single French Canadian to an important position. Now I see here the item "salaries and wages" and I feel I may ask the minister if he has been able, since the establishment of his department, to find at least one person from the province of Quebec or from any other part of Canada with a thorough knowledge of French to act in an important capacity in that department. Because, as I said some time ago, some English speaking people, probably without any ill will, ignore the fact that there is a very touchy French speaking group in

Canada-and one cannot blame them for being touchy. We have always been a minority, and we are still considered as such except in the province of Quebec which some seem to be treating as some kind of a reservation- French Canada-the province of Quebec only.
Well, I think we are entitled to be touchy and to ask, each time the occasion arises, what we are entitled to in Canada.
I am making this speech without any acrimony or spitefulness. But I ask this: if it has not already been done, I hope the matter will be reconsidered, and that it will be realized that the French element was entitled to be represented in that department, because we do have in Quebec forestry experts.
I know that, for some time, the Quebec government has been picking senior federal civil servants to bring them over to Quebec. Well, we could do the same thing, and pick within the provincial civil service a certain number of experts whom we could bring here in Ottawa; we would then establish the required balance, which would make French Canadians happy, as they are entitled to be.
(Text):


Paul Raymond Martineau: Shall item 635 carry?


William Moore Benidickson: No, Mr. Chairman, I have a few remarks to make. I could conclude in about two minutes if the committee would give me the privilege, and if there are no other speakers.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Has the hon. member leave to make these remarks?


Frank Howard: I think perhaps it might be well to call it five o'clock, Mr. Chairman.


Paul Raymond Martineau: So that the house may proceed to the consideration of private members' business, pursuant to section 3 of standing order 15, it is my duty to rise, report certain resolutions and request leave to sit again.
Item stands.
Progress reported.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



REPRESENTATION ACT


Mr. Erik Nielsen (Yukon) moved: the second reading of Bill No. C-14, to amend the Representation Act.
Representation Act
He said: Mr. Speaker-


Frank Howard: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Order; the hon. member for Skeena rises on a point of order.


Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, the point of order which I should like the house to consider is this. Part of the principle contained in Bill C-14 is to repeal one part of the act and substitute something else therefor. The bill makes reference to the Canada Elections Act, chapter 23 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1952, and further on it makes reference to schedule IV of that act.
I would draw to the attention of the house that by virtue of the Statutes of Canada, 1960, chapter 39, the act which is mentioned in this bill, namely the Canada Elections Act, chapter 23, Revised Statutes of Canada, 1952, was repealed and no longer exists. I think the bill is not drafted in such a way as to indicate clearly what is sought as one of its principles, and I think this is a question which should be cleared up.


Mr. Speaker:: I think this is a matter that can be raised in the course of the debate. If the bill does not make sense in its present form, it is capable of amendment, and the question raised by the hon. member can be properly taken up in the course of second reading as a matter of debate. I think it is perhaps not a matter of order at this stage.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, could I say a word before Your Honour makes a final decision on that point. If, as I apprehend, the bill does more than merely change the name of the constituency and seeks to alter the representation in the House of Commons, it would appear to me that this would be a constitutional amendment. It is true, of course, that it is an amendment within the power of the parliament of Canada to make, judging from the precedents; but there would still be some question as to whether it would be proper even to consider a bill under the guise of an amendment to the Canada Elections Act which in fact was seeking to amend the British North America Act.


Erik Nielsen: Mr. Speaker, if I may speak on the point of order and set the minds of my hon. friends from Bonavista-Twillingate and Skeena at rest, I intended when I started to speak, to explain to the house that it is not my intention to ask the house to proceed with the bill in its present form, but I wished to introduce certain amendments, which must be done not during second reading but during consideration of the bill in committee of the whole.

Representation Act
I am quite aware of the point raised by my hon. friend from Skeena, and I am prepared to deal with it in committee of the whole, because there is no schedule IV to the act but only schedule III. One of the features of the amendments which I will be asking to be made in committee of the whole is not to increase the membership of this house but rather to give representation to Canadians who are now unrepresented.


Mr. Speaker:: Then without coming to a final conclusion on the matter which has been very properly raised, perhaps the debate will indicate what substance there is to the possibility that there is a constitutional problem in the bill.


Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether I might just raise one other point. I would ask the hon. member for the Yukon whether he would indicate in his initial remarks what the proposed amendment is, because it may seek to alter the principle contained in the present bill in such a way that the proper course would be to withdraw it and present another bill.


Erik Nielsen: I intend to do that, Mr. Speaker. The bill is one which in its present form seeks to amend the Representation Act and there are certain consequential amendments to the Canada Elections Act. At the outset I should like to explain that I do not ask the house to pass the bill in its existing form. I will be asking, with the assistance of my hon. friend from Chapleau, for certain amendments to be made which would have the effect, not of adding a member to this house for the Keewatin and Franklin districts of the Northwest Territories but rather of adding those two districts to the existing electoral district of Mackenzie river, thus giving the residents of the Keewatin and Franklin districts the representation which thus far they have been denied.
Before I explain those changes I wish to very briefly emphasize the reasons which urge this house to give second and final readings to this bill before the house rises to attend the royal assent to certain bills which Your Honour has indicated will occur at 15 minutes to six o'clock.
First, and most important, is the fundamental concept that in a free democratic society such as ours in Canada, every adult Canadian is by law clothed with the right to take part in government and to vote for representatives who govern. This basic concept was set out clearly in the four kinds of rights to which the United Nations dedicated itself in the universal declaration of human rights in 1948, a declaration which grew out

of the public demand for advancing the inherent and equal rights "of all members of the human family".
Second, and of paramount importance in all the circumstances, is the protection afforded to all Canadians by the Canadian Bill of Rights. Since the passage of that act there can no longer be any excuse for continuing to deny to any Canadian the human rights and fundamental freedoms of Canadians wherever they may live in Canada and without discrimination by reason of race, national origin, colour, religion or sex.
Third, I do not think any member of this house would take issue with me when I say that it would be a dangerous practice indeed to perpetuate the policy of King George III of England of taxation without representation. This is precisely what has been happening to some 8,000 northern and Arctic Canadians for more than half a century.
Fourth, I submit to the house that it might perhaps be prudent, in terms of Canadian sovereignty, to enfranchise our northern and Arctic Canadians before the Russians do so.
In short, this bill which I propose, with the assistance of my hon. friend from Chapleau, to amend by these proposals which I intend to explain in committee of the whole should, I submit, be allowed immediate second reading for these four very compelling reasons. In summary, it would eliminate the long standing denial of the franchise to some 3,000 to 4,000 northern and Arctic Canadians. Second, it would eliminate that discimination with which the Canadian Bill of Rights concerns itself. Third, it would eliminate the abhorrent practice of taxing Canadians without their right to be represented in parliament, and fourth, it would strengthen our northern and Arctic sovereignty.
The essential principle of this bill-for the benefit of my hon. friend from Skeena-is quite simple: it is to extend to those Canadians living in the Keewatin and Franklin districts of the Northwest Territories that which is their undeniable right, the right to vote.
At the time of introducing this bill I thought this would be best achieved by providing for an additional member of this house to represent these two districts. Since introducing the bill on January 22 last, however, the territorial council of the Northwest Territories has been meeting in Ottawa and has passed a resolution calling for the consolidation of the existing three districts of the Northwest Territories-that is, the Mackenzie, the Keewatin and the Franklin districts-into only two districts divisable, approximately, by the northerly extension of

the 102nd meridian which divides Manitoba from Saskatchewan.
It is contemplated that this division, to occur in 1964, will result in each of the two districts having its own territorial council. I should also explain here that this is a further urgent reason for extending the franchise to the resident Canadians of Keewatin and Franklin in that they are not even represented on the existing territorial council of the Mackenzie River.
It is at this time, I submit-that is, in 1964 -that consideration might be given by parliament to the addition of a new member. In other words, the circumstances have changed since I originally introduced the bill of January 22 on the basis of a resolution passed by the territorial council of the Mackenzie District, Northwest Territories.
In the result, therefore, the amendments to this bill which will be proposed in committee of the whole will eliminate that aspect of the bill which would require the addition of a member of parliament to represent these two districts of the Northwest Territories. Instead the two districts concerned, Keewatin and Franklin, would be added to the electoral district of Mackenzie River, thus enfranchising those Canadians resident in Keewatin and Franklin.
I have available over 100 copies in English and in French of the reprinted bill as proposed to be amended in committee of the whole. I will ask, Mr. Speaker, that these be distributed to hon. members immediately upon going into committee of the whole. I have also attached to the bills a copy of maps in English and in French to assist hon. members during their consideration of this measure in committee.
There is a degree of urgency about obtaining both second and third readings today. As all our members are aware, if the bill does not pass through both second and third readings today it will go to the foot of the list and is not likely to come up again this session. Since this session will probably be the last before a general election, this would mean that these Canadians affected by this measure and entitled by law to the vote would once again be denied their rights as electors. I am sure no hon. member of this house would wish to delay the passage of this bill in those circumstances and, in the result, be the cause of perpetuating the disfranchisement of these northern Canadians. In addition, and this is most important, the chief electoral officer of Canada must be given the opportunity to erect the necessary election machinery in the areas of Canada concerned.
Representation Act
In urging the co-operation of all hon. members in giving an immediate second reading to this bill so that we may go into committee of the whole to consider the proposed amendments, let me say that for some time I have been urged by citizens groups such as the Baker Lake citizens association in the Keewatin and the Mackenzie River Progressive Conservative association to obtain recognition by this Canadian parliament of the fundamental rights of all qualified Canadians to representation in this house. I therefore urge all hon. members to allow the bill to go immediately to the committee of the whole for consideration of the proposed amendment.


Mr. Speaker:: I see the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Howard) rising, but before he speaks may I say that if the house is disposed to accept the plea of the hon. member for the Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) for its co-operation it seems to me that the procedure would be greatly simplified if the house would give unanimous consent to the withdrawal of the bill which is on the order paper and the substitution of the amended bill at this stage. Then the bill could go to the committee in its amended form and we would avoid the complication of making amendments to it there, particularly as the hon. member has indicated he has copies of the revised bill in English and French which could now be distributed.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Shall we proceed to consider the bill right away?


An hon. Member:: Yes.


Frank Howard: Perhaps the house would permit a delay of a moment or two while the copies of the new bill are being distributed.
I rise to indicate what I would have indicated with reference to the previous bill, except for the reference to the act which was repealed. I wish to assure the hon. member for the Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) of our support for this measure. We approve the desire to give to a group of people, no matter how small or how large, the right to representation in the House of Commons.
Hon. members will recall that one of the first things I sought to do upon taking my place as a member of this house was to accomplish substantially the same thing with respect to native Indians in Canada, that is, to give them the right to vote in federal elections. That idea subsequently took the form of legislation. We in this party have always supported any attempts to give the people all possible rights to representation in

Representation Act
this house, and, naturally, we have no hesitation in supporting the bill which is before us.
I note that one provision of the bill- indeed, it is one of the principal parts of the measure-relates not to the Representation Act but to the Canada Elections Act. I think this was necessary because of the nature of the area referred to in the bill and described by the hon. member from the Yukon. This provision seeks to give the chief electoral officer of Canada the right to appoint more than one election clerk, as I read it at a quick glance. This provision is necessary, as I see it, to ensure that it may be physically possible to operate the machinery of the Canada Elections Act so that everyone in the area has an opportunity to vote.
Apropos of this subject, there is another matter which we might consider. It is not only the returning officer and the various election clerks who will have difficulty in covering the area properly and seeing that the machinery of the Canada Elections Act can operate effectively. I think we must direct our attention to the vast size of this area and consider making the changes necessary to ensure that the elected representative of that region together with those who may be candidates can receive some assistance from the public treasury in order that they may have the opportunity to travel across this vast territory which, according to my memory, is more than a million square miles in extent. It is a tremendously vast area, and I think we should consider establishing the principle that the public treasury may assist candidates to ensure that the message gets across to these people in a political way. Otherwise we may end by giving them only the right and the opportunity to vote in elections without providing for that sense of attachment to the candidate or to political situations which is possible in urban areas.
We are happy to support this bill and the request of the hon. member for the Yukon. We shall do everything possible to facilitate the passage of the measure.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Crouse in the chair.
On clause 1-Total number of members.
Erik Nielsen: Mr. Chairman, with the permission of the committee I feel I should explain as we go along each of the clauses and my purpose for offering an amendment. The only change this clause seeks to effect is to substitute the term Mackenzie River, which was heretofore the electoral district, with the name Northwest Territories electoral district. Henceforth the electoral district would be called the Northwest Territories electoral district. As

will be shown on the maps which I have provided to all hon. members the district will include all the Arctic islands and all the mainland of the eastern portion of Canada above the 60th parallel except, of course, the northern portions of Quebec and Newfoundland. The amendment does not seek to change the constitution of the house in that the total membership would remain at 265 members.


Mr. Morton:: Would the hon. member give the committee some idea of the population of the area?


Erik Nielsen: As at 1959 there were 7,577 residents in the Keewatin district. Roughly 75 per cent of these would be of Eskimo origin. The remainder would be northern affairs administrative personnel, R.C.M.P., D.O.T. personnel, weather station personnel and other civil servants including industrial workers at Rankin inlet and individuals of that category.
In the Franklin district in the Arctic islands there would be another 500 people approximately. The two districts would comprise a population of approximately 8,000. A fair estimate would be that approximately 4,000 of those are entitled to vote.


William Moore Benidickson: Does the hon. member mean to suggest that the district of Franklin would be a separate constituency? What would be the total population of that area?


Erik Nielsen: I do not recall whether or not the hon. member was in the chamber during the initial portion of my remarks. I explained that subsequent to January 22 when I first introduced this bill the Northwest Territories council passed a resolution which would divide the three existing districts of the territories- Mackenzie, Keewatin and Franklin-into two political divisions each with its own territorial council. The exact population cannot be ascertained until the results of the census are available to us but the approximate population of the Franklin district alone would1 be about 500 souls. This district includes all the Arctic islands.


William Moore Benidickson: With adults and children it would be about 700?


Erik Nielsen: There are mostly adults in that area of Canada. This amendment does not seek to create a separate electoral district out of any of the existing districts of the territories but rather to consolidate the whole of the Northwest Territories into one electoral district.


William Moore Benidickson: 
Erik Nielsen: May I rise to explain to the hon. member that the bill does not seek to add a seat. It is designed merely to give the vote to the Canadians who reside in the two districts referred to.


William Moore Benidickson: I am looking at the explanatory note which says-


Mr. Martel:: It has been amended.


William Moore Benidickson: I am sorry, I misunderstood. That would perhaps eliminate that particular criticism. There are not many ministers of the crown present with us at the moment. I believe a bill of the consequence of this bill deserves an explanation as to the opinion of the government. This is important because in the speech from the throne we had an indication that following the decennial census we would be obliged, as is usual every ten
Representation Act
years, to examine the electoral set-up in Canada. I simply wish to ask that one of the ministers of the few who are present rise and give us some guidance concerning government policy on this issue. This relates to a policy which was announced in the speech from the throne and involves a subsequent commission.


Erik Nielsen: I might say that the principle of the bill basically is really quite simple. All that it seeks to do is to give some 8,000 Canadians the right to vote for the representatives who govern them. That is all it seeks to do. It does not involve any commission or redistribution. It does not involve anything else than the basic fundamental concept of the right to vote.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
On clause 2-"Northwest Territories" substituted for "Mackenzie River".
Erik Nielsen: Clause 2 is simply an amendment to the Representation Act substituting the words "Northwest Territories" or "electoral district of Northwest Territories" wherever the expression "electoral district of Mackenzie River" appears in that act.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
On clause 3-Schedule amended.
Erik Nielsen: Clause 3 simply describes the vast area to which my friend the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River referred as constituting the Northwest Territories. It simply amends the schedule to the Representation Act and enlarges the existing Mackenzie district to include the whole of the Northwest Territories comprising Mackenzie, Keewatin and Franklin.
I think this will be an appropriate point for me to comment on the point raised by my friend the hon. member for Skeena and subsequently referred to by my friend the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River. I also have a fairly comprehensive experience in travelling over vast areas in the north. I might say that the situation has been vastly improved in recent years with the advent of the D.E.W. line, mining activity up there and the oil and gas exploration and activity in those areas. There are now many more air flights made into the Arctic islands and into the northern Arctic areas of Canada generally than were made formerly. It is not an insurmountable difficulty now, so the chief electoral officer assures me, to set up the necessary election machinery, provided of course there is sufficient opportunity before an election is called, or no more than there would be in most areas of the Mackenzie river district.

Representation Act
I should also say, in respect of travelling in these two districts, that there are roughly 15 administrative centres where there is a population concentration which is entitled to vote and these 15 administrative centres are serviced fairly regularly. With this type of communication improvement it seems to me that it should not be too difficult for the member who might subsequently represent the district to hitchhike rides from one portion to the other in the discharge of his obligation to represent his people. I might also point out one further factor, namely the greatly improved radio communication in those areas which allows that sort of communication.


Frank Howard: The explanation of the hon. member as to the relative ease that exists now as compared with conditions a few years ago with regard to getting around a district such as this is welcome news. I have a constituency which is considered to be large in itself but which, compared to this new district, is one quite easy to deal with. While I can appreciate that it might be easy to hitch hike rides, as the hon. members says, through a district which has more square miles than two provinces put together, I think the matter will not be quite that simple. I am still interested in the concept that the public treasury should take account of the geographic features as between ridings and should pay an amount additional-and perhaps this will be done by way of differentiation-to the indemnity which members now receive. May I say this provision would not be confined to the Northwest Territories but would I am sure be applicable to the constituency which the hon. member represents, the constituencies of Port Arthur or Grand Falls-White Bay-Labrador or to my own and that of others whose territory is over the 1,000 square miles mark. I am not raising this matter in order to be critical of the bill, as on second reading I indicated our support for it. What I am now suggesting would be something which the hon. member could not introduce in any event because it would require a money bill and consequently could be introduced only by a member of the cabinet. In any event, this is a factor which I think must be considered in future years in order that a member would have reflected in his sessional indemnity the geographic factors with which he is obliged to contend and the high costs of transportation. Having done some hitchhiking through the northern part of my constituency I myself have discovered that hitchhiking is not always free, but that sometimes it is costly as well.


William Moore Benidickson: Obligations.


Frank Howard: Obligations?


William Moore Benidickson: Yes.


Frank Howard: Perhaps my hon. friend the member for Kenora-Rainy River uses different phrases. However, I say that it is not free and that this fact must be taken into account. I hope that the hon. member for that constituency, when he is with us and whoever he may be, will be able to add another voice in support of this particular plea and that some day the government in office, whichever one it might be, will adopt the course suggested of concerning itself about the fact that all constituencies in the country are not equal, having regard to geographic and other factors and recognize that therefore all indemnities should not be equal and provide that some additional consideration be given there.
(Translation):


Jean-Jacques Martel: Mr. Chairman, I have just a few remarks to make on section 3 of this bill. It is precisely because of the provisions of section 3 that I am pleased to support Bill C-14, as amended, which has been introduced by the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen).
I wish to point out that French copies of the bill have been distributed to hon. members. A map, in French, prepared by the Depart ment of Northern Affairs and National Resources, is included. It shows all the northern territories which will be added to the present district of Mackenzie to form what will henceforth be called the Northwest Territories.
There is another point which concerns my riding and which is of interest to Quebec residents and electors, as it is to me. It concerns the coastal islands along James bay and Hudson's bay. Subsection (b) of section 3 seems to provide for the eventual inclusion of those islands in the territory of the province of Quebec, which indeed claims some of them as its own. That is the only observation I wanted to make in that connection, Mr. Chairman.
(Text):


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
On clause 4-Appointment of more than one election clerk.
Frank Howard: Mr. Chairman, this clause provides for the appointment of additional people as election clerks and so on and the delegation of authority to election clerks by the returning officer, and I should like to be assured that this authority and power rests in the first instance with the chief electoral officer.


Erik Nielsen: That is correct.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported.
Mr. Speaker:: When shall the said bill be read the third time?


Erik Nielsen: Now.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Next sitting. By way of explanation, Mr. Speaker, in view of some of the comments made by members who have examined the bill perhaps it might stand for third reading at the next sitting. It will still be at the top of the list and will be the first item to be considered. In the interval the law officers of the crown might examine the bill to see if it is accurate in all respects.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, there is a point that the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River has drawn to my attention which is relevant to the consideration of this matter, and that is the procedure in having a bill that had been introduced into the house reprinted after it came into the possession of the house. There may be precedents for what has happened but I do not recall them.
I do not propose to make an issue of the matter now but, unless the procedure is quite regular, I wonder whether Your Honour would take it under consideration because it does seem to me to raise some pretty fundamental questions. We give first reading to a bill and hon. members prepare themselves to debate on the basis of the bill that is before them. They then get into committee of the whole and find themselves confronted with a radically different bill.
I did not feel that I should raise the matter in the committee and appear to be obstructing proceedings because the hon. gentleman had very politely given an explanation of the difficulties that occurred to the hon. member for Skeena and some of the rest of us. But it does seem to me that we should not lightly depart from the regular practices of the house, and I wondered whether I might submit to Your Honour that this point should be carefully considered.


Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, under other circumstances the practice of giving unanimous consent to second and third readings on the same day when dealing with such a bill would be quite acceptable. However, for the reasons mentioned by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate and also the fact that I do not believe the substitute bill was printed in sufficient numbers to be available to all members of the house, I think it would
Representation Act
be well to hold it over in order that members may have the opportunity to consider it further.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I understood-


William Moore Benidickson: May I speak to the point of order?


Mr. Speaker:: Yes. I just wanted to make it clear that I understood that the house had agreed that the bill would be read the third time at the next sitting of the house and that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate then raised a point of order as to the propriety of the house printing a second bill of the same number and form but differing in substance, a point which I think deserves consideration.
In this case the house by unanimous consent has accepted the reprinted bill and therefore perhaps the point of order is not one that arises now but one that might arise if similar circumstances occurred. I can assure hon. members that I will give some thought to the problem and alert the officers to the possibility of its arising again and the proper course to follow.


William Moore Benidickson: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, there has been equanimity so far as the principle of the bill is concerned. I simply wanted to draw the attention of the house to the fact that in my experience it is somewhat unusual to have an amended bill put before us that is so different in content from the bill originally introduced. It is true that the house is master of its procedures and consent was obtained for acceptance of the amended bill but on the cover of the bill are the words "reprinted as proposed to be amended in committee of the whole". It is not something that was done in committee of the whole. There is a green rubber stamp impression on the cover which, having some experience in these matters, I think indicates that it has been received by the officers of the house on a certain date. In this case the date is February 22, yesterday.
The original bill to which I referred when I made some remarks in the debate had an explanatory note but the effect of the amended bill completely negates the explanatory note in the original bill. It was simply for the guidance of Your Honour, who I know will take an interest in this matter, that I wanted to say that in my experience this was an unusual occurrence. It is true that the consent of the house was obtained, but I know Your Honour will give consideration to the points raised.


Mr. Speaker:: I thank hon. members for their references to the matter. It is one that deserves consideration.

Business of the House THE ROYAL ASSENT
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 bills:
An act to amend the Children of War Dead (Education Assistance) Act.
An act to amend the Civilian War Pensions and Allowances Act.
An act to amend an act respecting the construction of a line of railway by Canadian National Railway Company from Optic lake to Chisel lake, and the purchase by Canadian National Railway Company from the International Nickel Company of Canada, Limited, of a line of railway from Sipiwesk to a point on Bumtwood river near Mystery lake, all in the province of Manitoba.
An act respecting the construction of a line of railway in the province of Alberta by Canadian National Railway Company from Whitecourt, Alberta, in a westerly direction for a distance of approximately 23.2 miles to the property of Pan American Petroleum Corporation.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the house leader whether, in view of the concord, harmony and co-operation which
has prevailed throughout the day, he could find it in his heart to give us at least a general indication of what the government's program will be for the whole of next week.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I would gladly enter into an agreement with the hon. member for Bona-vista-Twillingate and I will give the program for the entire week if he will announce the subject of the supply motion which will be debated on Monday and Tuesday.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, the seductive invitation of the hon. gentleman is of course entirely subversive to all the rights of an opposition and is not one that I could entertain; but I can assure the hon. gentleman that my conduct will be characterized by that spirit of co-operation which I always show in the house, and I hope he will respond to my invitation.


Gordon Minto Churchill: On Thursday and Friday we will follow with estimates, the likelihood being that the further supplementary estimates which were not finished today will be taken up on Wednesday. Whether or not some legislation will be introduced, I cannot say at this moment.


John Whitney Pickersgill: And there will be a supply motion on Monday?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Oh, yes.


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

[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:
DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE Production and marketing branch-
615.	Contributions to Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the governor in council of one half of the amounts paid by the governments of those provinces to farmers in respect of harvesting and baling of cereal crops for fodder to a maximum of $2.50 per ton, $190,000.
Land rehabilitation, irrigation and water storage
projects-
Irrigation and water storage projects in the western provinces including the South Saskatchewan river project; the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act program; land protection, reclamation and development-
616.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $3,200,000.
Special-
617.	Prairie Farm Assistance Act administration- further amount required, $498,693.

[Stage Direction]
Indian affairs branch-
Indian agencies-
618.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $136,000.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
624. To sustain technological capability in Canadian industry by supporting selected defence development programs-to increase by $4,000,000 total commitments authorized by vote 72 of the main estimates, 1951-62, $1.

[Stage Direction]
Contingencies and miscellaneous-
630.	To authorize the establishment of a special account in the consolidated revenue fund to be called the peace treaty claims (Japan) settlement
Supply-Items Passed
account, to which shall be credited all amounts received from Japan by way of settlement of its obligations under article 18 (a) of the treaty of peace between Canada and Japan that was signed at San Francisco on the 8th of September, 1951, and, notwithstanding section 35 of the Financial Administration Act, to authorize payments out of the said account in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with the peace treaty claims (Japan) settlement regulations established by order in council P.C. 1961-1850 of the 22nd day of December, 1961, in respect of claims and in respect of expenses incurred in investigating and reporting on such claims and to authorize the repayment out of the peace treaty claims (Japan) settlement account of all amounts that have been paid out toward such expenses under the authority of this or any other Appropriation Act, $1.
General items of payroll costs including superannuation payments-
631.	Government's contribution to the hospital insurance (outside Canada) plan-further amount required and to authorize the treasury board to make regulations to extend the scope of the plan established pursuant to vote 668 of the Appropriation Act No. 5, 1958, to include members of the regular forces in such circumstances and for such periods as the regulations prescribe, $90,000.
632.	To authorize persons who were contributors under the Civil Service Superannuation Act immediately prior to the 1st day of January, 1954, and who became contributors under the Public Service Superannuation Act on that date, who failed to elect under subsection (5) of section 25 of the said act before the 1st day of January, 1955, to elect, in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the governor in council, to count service that would have been countable by them under the said section if they had not so failed to elect, and to deem such election to be valid for all purposes of the said act, $1.
Special-
633.	Contribution to the New Brunswick disaster fund, $50,000.
634.	Grant to l'association des university de langue frangaise to assist in defraying the expenses of the first world congress of French language universities held in Canada in 1961, $15,000.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, February 26, 1962