1962-03-22

HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATES


[Stage Direction]
.. : .12 . ' . , :
[Stage Direction]
:
[Stage Direction]

Thursday, March 22, 1962


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege affecting the rights and privileges of every member of this house. I do so in relation to an editorial of yesterday's date entitled "Time for an election" in the Toronto Telegram. I do not object to the implication in the editorial that the opposition is directing parliament, for I can easily see the validity of this point, but what I do think is a statement in contempt of parliament is the following:
Within the last few days the Liberal member for Hull deliberately provoked the Deputy Speaker-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: The word "provoke" means "to rouse the anger of". The Toronto Telegram, then, is clearly implying that the Deputy Speaker acted in anger rather than in justice and according to the rules of the house in demanding that the hon. member for Hull withdraw certain of his remarks on March 16. This is a slight on the Deputy Speaker and therefore on the position of the Speaker of this house, in our opinion.
In these circumstances I move, seconded by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch):
That Mr. J. D. MacFarlane, editor in chief of the Telegram, be called before the bar of the house to apologize for this insult to parliament.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Pigeon:: A good joke.


Mr. Speaker:: Before the hon. member is permitted to place this motion before the house it is my duty to determine whether or not there is a prima facie breach of privilege involved in the editorial of which the hon. member complains. I naturally approach this subject with every intention and desire of protecting the good name of the chairmen and speakers of the house, which of course is essential to do if the house is to carry out its high responsibilities. However, I And difficulty in following the reasoning of the hon.
member when he concludes that the Deputy Speaker is accused of having acted in anger simply from a deduction from the use by the Telegram of the word "provoked". If I may refer to the hon. member's statement of privilege, his objection is to the following words:
Within the last few days the Liberal member for Hull deliberately provoked the Deputy Speaker-
From the use of the word "provoked" the hon. member concludes that the Deputy Speaker is accused of being angry and therefore did not act as he should have acted. Therefore he concludes that the Telegram has accused the Deputy Speaker of acting as he should not have acted. In my judgment the inference taxes one's imagination too greatly to be accepted as the basis for a motion.
I find that the Concise Oxford dictionary says that "provoke" means "to rouse". Therefore the Telegram's editorial might be interpreted as meaning that the hon. member for Hull roused the Deputy Speaker. Other definitions are "to irritate; to instigate; to tempt; to allure; to call forth". I am afraid that although I agree with the hon. member's desire to protect the Chair, I could not accept the words complained of as being sufficient to raise a prima facie question of a breach of privilege of the house.



AGRICULTURE


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Acting Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to inform the house of the government's intentions with respect to support of dairy products under the Agricultural Stabilization Act for the year commencing May 1, 1962.
Support for dairy products at the same level presently in effect will be continued for the forthcoming year. In order to increase the consumption of butter, and thus bring consumption and production into closer balance, the agricultural stabilization board will be authorized to lower its buying and selling price for butter from the current 64 cents to 52 cents per pound, effective May 1. This action will have the effect of reducing the price of butter by about 12 cents per pound, which should result in a price of from 56 cents to 59 cents at the retail level.

Dairy Products Support Prices
To maintain support at the present level to dairy farmers who market their milk and cream for manufacturing purposes, and thus whose returns are directly related to the price of butter, these farmers will receive compensatory payments based on the difference between the 64 cents support level and the 52 cents board price for butter.
The price at which the stabilization board will buy cheese will be set in relation to the 52 cents purchase price for butter. Cheese milk shippers will receive the same compensatory payment as is to be made to those supplying milk for butter manufacture.
The revised purchase prices for butter and cheese, plus the compensatory payments, will provide the same measure of support to producers supplying milk for butter and cheese production as is provided under the present support program.
The compensatory payment will be in addition to the 25 cents per hundred pounds subsidy now paid to shippers of manufacturing milk. It will not be paid on milk used in the fluid milk market or on surplus milk from producers shipping to the fluid milk market. The pricing of fluid milk and any control of surplus production in this segment of the industry lies within local jurisdiction in each province. Milk used for the production of concentrated milk products will continue to receive the present subsidy of 25 cents per hundred pounds but will not be eligible for the additional compensatory payment.
The stabilization board has been instructed to enter into discussions with producer and industry representatives with respect to details of the new program, including arrangements for the price transition. Following these discussions a full announcement of the details will be made.


Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East):: It will be desirable, of course, to await the details which are to be announced later, as the minister has just told us, before making a final assessment of this announcement of policy. However, the general lines announced by the minister follow pretty well the suggestion made by the national Liberal council last January; and, as hon. members will recall, the hon. member for Leeds, who among others during the course of this session, made representations in this house which we are happy to see have been observed by the Minister of Agriculture.


Mr. Arnold Peters (Timiskaming):: We believe the dairy industry itself will be happy that the government has now reached a decision on this matter. I had the opportunity of meeting some of the representatives who

were negotiating local contracts in the city of Ottawa some weeks ago, and they had to adjourn their meetings for several weeks because the government had not made up its mind on this question.
The subsidy and the compensatory payments which are being made amount to even more, I believe, than the federation of agriculture has asked for. On the other hand, is the government giving any consideration to bringing into the pattern of these compensatory payments some benefit for the fluid milk industry itself? It would seem to me that until a relationship is established between the fluid milk industry and butter production-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member should confine his remarks to comment- and brief comment-on the announcement of policy which has been made. He should not discuss extraneous matters, and he should reserve his argumentative approach to the subject until the matter can be debated.


William Arnold Peters: The reason this has been mentioned is that the government may find difficulty in putting these compensatory payments into effect unless consideration is given to the fluid milk problem; because this is a butter fat problem, and the suggestion that the prices paid for butter should be lowered affects the whole dairy industry and its interrelated parts. I would only ask the minister to give consideration to this immediately.

On the orders of the day:


Mr. Harold Hicks (Fraser Valley):: Mr. Speaker, I have a very important question I should like to ask the Acting Minister of Agriculture. In the new policy just announced by the minister, will the position of the milk producers in British Columbia, who have a pooling system under the provincial milk marketing act, be safeguarded by special arrangements? If so, will there be discussions with representatives of the industry in the province to work out the details?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, as I think the hon. gentleman and other hon. members are aware, suggestions have been made for some two years past by the dairy farmers of Canada and other producer organizations that a scheme somewhat along these lines should be put into effect. As a result of that the producer associations in British Columbia have approached the stabilization board and held conversations with them in regard to what their position would be in the event such a scheme were put into effect.

It was agreed that further discussions would he left until a statement of government policy was made in connection with this matter. Now that this has been done, further discussions will be held with the producer associations of British Columbia with a view to working out an equitable arrangement which will take into consideration the special pooling situation which exists in that province.



RAILWAYS. AIR LINES AND SHIPPING ESTABLISHMENT OP COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS, AIR LINES AND SHIPPING OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY THE GOVERNMENT

[Stage Direction]
On the order: Government notices of motion:
March 20-The Minister of Transport-The following proposed motion:-
That a sessional committee on railways, air lines and shipping owned and controlled by the government, be appointed to consider the accounts, estimates and bills relating to the Canadian National Railways and Trans-Canada Air Lines, saving always the powers of the committee of supply in relation to the voting of public moneys; and that the said committee be empowered to send for persons, papers and records, and to report from time to time; and that, notwithstanding standing order 67 in relation to the limitation of the number of members, the said committee shall consist of Messrs. Badanai, Brassard (Lapointe), Broome, Browne (Vancouver-Kingsway), Campeau, Carter, Chevrier, Creaghan, Fisher, Forbes, Granger, Grills, Horner (Jasper-Edson), Howe, Kennedy, McDonald (Hamilton South), McFarlane, McPhillips, McWilliam, Mitchell, Monteith (Verdun), Pascoe, Robinson, Rowe, Smallwood and Smith (Simcoe North).
Mr. Speaker:: Pursuant to section 2 of standing order 21 this government notice of motion stands transferred to and ordered for consideration under government orders at the next sitting of the house.



ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Miss Judy V. LaMarsh (Niagara Falls):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. Is the minister aware that when an unemployed iron ore miner wrote to the Prime Minister asking him to do something about unemployment, according to The Miner's Voice of Winnipeg for March 1962-
Instead of receiving a sympathetic reply the miner received a visit from the R.C.M.P. He was told if he repeated insulting letters to Mr. Diefenbaker he would be in trouble.
Has the minister any comment on this report?
Inquiries of the Ministry


Hon. E. D. Fulton (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, the report is entirely unknown to me. If any such incident took place I should hope it would be brought to my attention. In the absence of any such proof I find it extremely difficult to believe that such an incident actually did take place. If anyone has evidence of any such incident I should be glad to be provided with proof of it so that I may make a full investigation.



COLUMBIA RIVER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a question to the Prime Minister. In view of press reports from Washington that United States authorities have declared that the state and interior departments have recommended that the Canadian government be urged to submit the Columbia river treaty to parliament for ratification immediately, leaving what is referred to as an internal dispute with British Columbia to be settled later by arbitration, would the Prime Minister inform the house whether he has received any such extraordinary suggestion from the United States government?


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, following the usual rules regarding communications between nations I think I shall go no further than to say that since the hon. gentleman asked me a question the other day as to whether a message had been received from Washington, a message has been received.




[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: wish to address a question to the Minister of Finance. In view of a press report that the premier of British Columbia announced on his return from the United States last week that he has asked Ottawa to relinquish its authority on the Columbia project and let British Columbia finance and proceed with the project by itself, would the Minister of Finance inform the house whether he received such a proposal from the premier during his recent discussions and, if so, what action the government intends to take?


Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I do not think it would be fair to the premier of British Columbia, or to the efforts that have been made in the course of our discussions over

Inquiries of the Ministry the past week end, to comment on particular points or specific aspects of the discussions which were held.



FEASIBILITY STUDY OF NATIONAL GRID PROPOSAL

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Bonavisia-Twillin-gate):: I should like to ask the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources whether the proposed technical study of the feasibility of the national power grid is to be conducted under his department and, if so, whether there have been any funds appropriated for the purpose.


Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: The feasibility study will be conducted under the auspices of the committee of ministers that met to discuss this subject last Monday. It will require no extra appropriation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could the minister say under what vote the expenses will be paid?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: There will be no additional money required for this study, inasmuch as the departmental officials will be carrying out the necessary technical work.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. H. McMillan (Welland):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. Is the government continuing to guarantee mortgages on apartment buildings in the Toronto area, when the Toronto press reports a high vacancy rate which is expected to get worse?


Hon. D. J. Walker (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, I am very happy that the hon. member asked me this question, although he has not given me notice. I did notice the story in this morning's paper. I have checked the metro planning board report upon which the Globe and Mail based this story. It is interesting to note the conclusions reached in the report.
Based on the average absorption of 500 units a month that has been the experience since 1959, the market has not reached the saturation point; and, although the average vacancy rate is the highest to date, it represents only a moderate increase over last year and is the smallest increase ever recorded.
Nevertheless, we foresaw several months ago that the pace of construction of rental accommodation was perhaps a little bit fast, even for Toronto. Officials of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation therefore

established a committee that screens all N.H.A. rental applications in the metro area and turns back those for which they judge there will be little or no demand. Since the committee was formed, only 40 per cent of the loans requested for rental units have been approved, and I might add that none has been approved during the past two months.
The N.H.A. content of those rental units presently under construction in metro numbers 6,400. But because of the quality of the buildings and the select basis on which the C.M.H.C. screening committee operates, no difficulty is being experienced in renting them. As a matter of fact the new N.H.A.-financed apartments in Toronto are being rented as quickly as they are completed and available for rental.
We have not, of course in metro any vacancies in limited dividend or public housing projects which are built and financed as rental accommodation for lower income families and for elderly persons.



C.M.H.C.-REPORTED RENT INCREASES TO SENIOR CITIZENS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works in view of recent correspondence reaching me and press reports to the effect that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which has authority-over low rental housing-I refer to apartments and homes-made possible by C.M. H.C. agreements with provincial and municipal authorities, has instructed the administrators to increase the rents of the senior citizens, the blind and disabled by $3 for single persons and $7 for married persons.
May I ask the minister, in view of the $10 increase in pension granted these persons by this House of Commons a few days ago, if the increase in rentals now demanded by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation was made with the knowledge and consent of the minister. If it was not, may I ask the minister if he will take this matter up with Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation in order to ensure that the old age pensioners who are dealing with Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation receive the full benefit of the $10 increase?
Hon. D. J. Walker (Minister of Public
Works): I am having a difficult time following the myriad questions, but I will be happy to sort them out and accept the questions as notice.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. L. M. Creaghan (Westmorland):: should like to address a question to the Minister of Labour. This is an important question, and it affects every member of the house. Can the minister advise the house whether there have been any new developments in the dispute between the locomotive engineers and the railways?


Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was in touch by telephone with the presidents of both railways as well as Mr. Travers of the locomotive engineers. Following the telephone conversations I dispatched to all concerned in the dispute a telegram which reads as follows:
-it is in critical interest of Canada and all Canadians that you and your officers resume negotiations .. . and make utmost effort to settle remaining matters in dispute as soon as possible before threatened strike . .. Stoppage of railway operations would be utterly disastrous in its impact on spring upsurge in Canadian economic activity. Please keep me closely in touch with progress of negotiations.
Today I have been advised that as a result of this telegram the parties to the dispute agreed to meet tomorrow morning at 10.30 o'clock.



SYDNEY MINES, N.S.    WORKING CONDITIONS OF FREIGHT HANDLERS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Leon Balcer (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Gloucester asked if I had received a letter from the Princess local, united mine workers of America, at Sydney Mines concerning the Northside freight handlers' association. I have indeed received a letter, and I have asked Canadian National Railways to give me a report on the situation.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. M. Benidickson (Kenora-Rainy River):: I should like to address a question to the Minister of Justice. I regret that I have not given him advance notice of it. Perhaps he might answer tomorrow if he has not been informed of the matter. Press reports this afternoon have indicated that disclosures have been made in the House of Representatives subcommittee in Washington indicating that the United States government is suing the Royal Bank of Canada with 26207-1-132
Inquiries of the Ministry respect to certain cheques that were not stopped in 1960 when there were political difficulties. Will the Minister of Justice indicate whether it is possible to have the United States government in United States courts sue a Canadian corporation for something that seems to involve a commercial transaction in Cuba?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, I shall be glad to look into this matter. However, I would have some reservations as to whether, in commenting on it, I would not be called upon to express a legal opinion, and on matters that do not fall within the responsibility of the government. Subject to the reservation that I should only report on a matter in so far as it lies within my responsibility as minister, I shall be glad to look into the matter and report to the house as soon as possible.



SONS OF FREEDOM


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: apologize for asking several questions today, but my constituents are provoked. I wish to ask the Minister of Justice if he has received a resolution from the Nelson chamber of commerce protesting his proposal to build a special prison in the Fraser valley for Douk-hobor convicts. If so, will he reconsider this matter to see whether dispersal in several prisons rather than concentration in one might be more apt to reduce the anti-social tendencies of these prisoners?


Edmund Davie Fulton: cannot say at the moment with certainty whether or not I have received a resolution from the Nelson chamber of commerce to this effect. I dare say I have, because I have received a number of communications from individuals and organizations in that area on this subject, to most, if not all, of which I have up to now replied to the effect that, while there is a good deal that can be said in favour of dispersing Sons of Freedom convicted to penitentiary terms in our institutions across Canada, nevertheless up to the present time, owing to the serious overcrowding in our maximum security institutions, this is not possible. We are left, therefore, with no alternative, in the light of the nature of the Sons of Freedom fanatics who are being convicted, and our previous experience with them as inmates of institutions, but to establish a separate institution for them, at least until such time as overcrowding in our institutions has been alleviated.

Inquiries of the Ministry COMBINES



INQUIRY AS TO REPORT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hubert Badanai (Fort William):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. Last January 30 I asked the minister if he had received any indication as to when the restrictive trade practices commission would report in respect of its inquiry relating to the manufacture, distribution and sale of drugs. The minister replied as follows:
No, Mr. Speaker, I have not a report or any definite indication. However, I can assure the hon. member that in discussions I have received clear assurance that this inquiry is being pursued with all possible dispatch.
I wonder if the minister is now in a position to report to the house in connection with this matter.


Edmund Davie Fulton: No,
Mr. Speaker, I am not in a position to add anything to what I said at that time. I have made inquiries from time to time, and there is a good deal of further work and analysis required to be made of the evidence that was taken. All I can say is that the commission is proceeding with all appropriate dispatch, but hon. members must recognize that this is a difficult and complicated task.
(Translation):



SHIPPING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Maurice Johnson (Chambly-Rouville):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport.
Last Monday evening the minister made a statement which was reported as follows on page 14 of the Nouveau Journal for Tuesday, March 21:
As early as this spring, we will carry out a study of the problems of boating on the riviere des Prairies.
Also according to the same newspaper, the minister added later on:
The time has come for the government to establish certain regulations and carry out the necessary work so that people may enjoy that sport in all safety.
Could the minister inform the house whether that project would also include the Richelieu river, especially in Beloeil, Chambly and St. John, where boating clubs are very important, not only in regard to boating but also as tourist attractions?


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, with regards to navigation, the section of the Richelieu river mentioned by

my hon. friend is very different from the riviere des Prairies and riviere des Mille lies. However, I shall be pleased to look into his request and, if possible, to comply with it.
(Text):



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. A. MacLean (Minister of Fisheries):: Yesterday the hon. member for Gloucester asked me a question which I took as notice. I now have an answer for him.
The Fisheries Act prohibits the discharge of any deleterious substance into waters frequented by fish. Since there are substantial quantities of heavy metal compounds such as copper, zinc and lead in the water from the abandoned mine shaft of the Brunswick Mining and Smelting Corporation, there is no doubt that this water would be deleterious. Officials of the Department of Fisheries are at the moment co-operating with the corporation in an effort to devise a method of disposal or treatment which will avoid any infraction of the act.



THE ROYAL FAMILY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: have an inquiry to direct to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister give the details of the Canadian tour of the Queen Mother, which has been announced for June?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I would be glad to give the house that information any time I have it before me. I will take the question as notice.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Martineau in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL RESOURCES National parks branch-
National parks and historic sites and monuments- 648. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $2,500,000.


William Hector McMillan: We seem to be getting more and more supplementary estimates all the time, and I do not know how we are going to get the money to meet them. However, I think we should be trying to cut down our expenses. The government promised to cut

out extravagance, and I hope there is no extravagance in this vote. On February 14 last, as recorded at page 851 of Hansard, question No. 133, the hon. member for Port Arthur asked a question in four parts. The first part read:
Has the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources spent any money to restore completely Arizona Charlie's famous Palace Grand dance hall for the occasion of the Dawson city gold rush festival?
The minister answered:
Yes, the Palace Grand theatre is being restored as a national historic site in time for public use during the gold rush festival.
I may say that I have seen a sketch of this dance hall, and it looks like a dance hall with a stage at one end and a bar to the side of it. As the second part of his question the hon. member for Port Arthur asked:
If so, (a) what was the amount (b) under what vote or statutory provision is the money being expended?
The answer was:
(a)	$138,463, to December 31, 1961.
(b)	Funds are provided in vote 285, national parks and historic sites and monuments-construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment; statutory authority is provided in the Historic Sites and Monuments Act.
I think the funds are being provided under this vote; at least we did not hear about the project last year under vote 285. As I say, I have read something about this dance hall in magazines but I do not pretend to know whether it is a dance hall or a theatre. Evidently it was run during the time of the gold rush by a wealthy American called Arizona Charlie who was in pursuit of more wealth by providing the boys with liquor, gambling, and other diversions for a price.


William Moore Benidickson: And this is to be an
historic site.


William Hector McMillan: To support what I say I have here a book on the Yukon, and I have read about it in magazines. This is a book from the library of parliament entitled "The Yukon", published by Hinton & Godsell, and it says that Arizona Charlie's Palace Grand was in competition with the Tivoli, Nigger Jim's Pavilion and other places in providing select entertainment, liquor, gambling, etc. I can tell the house something about this establishment, as I have read about it. There are accounts of painted dancers and other ladies who were present as an adjunct to such an establishment. Hon. members will find all that in this book; and now this dance hall, or theatre as the minister prefers to call it, has been declared an historical site, a shrine, or a monument and I want to know why.
26207-1-132J
Supply-Northern Affairs


John Whitney Pickersgill: A shrine?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: A site-spelled s-i-g-h-t-.


William Hector McMillan: I wonder is it to perpetuate the memory of Arizona Charlie, the ladies of the night or those who spent their substance there. I believe that declaring this place an historical site was a device in order to spend $138,000 on this particular project. It seems to me that if the government had this money to spend it might have been better spent on some memorial school, a small memorial hospital or something of that nature, because after all Dawson City is a small place. I do not think we should be spending money on this dance hall or theatre, call it what you will.


Paul Joseph James Martin: What is the
amount involved?


William Hector McMillan: The minister may tell us how much is being spent on this building. We know that $138,000 was spent up to the end of the year, but in his answer he indicated that it was not completed.


William Moore Benidickson: This particular minister is the last one who should spend money that way.


William Hector McMillan: The minister might also tell us when the official opening of the building will take place, what inscription will be on the plaque which will probably appear on the front of the building, and whether the Prime Minister will attend the opening and dedication.


William Moore Benidickson: "Opened by Right Hon. Walter Dinsdale"?


William Hector McMillan: The opposition spent many days last year on the estimates of the department of northern affairs, and we did not hear anything about this particular building. As I said, it was concealed in vote 285 under the acquisition of buildings, etc. We are now accused by the Prime Minister of holding up the estimates, but we always try to be vigilant and find out all we can. That is our job, but evidently in this case we were not vigilant enough and did not take enough time. I brought up one matter of extravagance in this department, and I think it is up to the minister to answer some of these questions.


Mr. Fisher:: I am glad the hon. member who preceded me brought up this question, because I was going to touch on it myself. I must say that in view of the personal reputation of the minister I was surprised to see this item. I know he has a sense of publicity but I also know he has a certain moral attitude, and I suppose one cancelled out the

Supply-Northern Affairs other and that is why we did not hear about Arizona Charlie's joint last year when we were dealing with the estimates.
I wanted to ask him some further questions on this. I appreciate the information that is on page 852 of Hansard, but my questions were generated by a quite interesting article written by Pierre Berton in the Toronto Star of February 5. The minister may have seen it. I suppose Mr. Berton has a bit of a professional interest in the Yukon since he has been involved, I think, in a television series and has published a very entertaining book on the Yukon. He says a number of things in this article upon which I think the minister should comment just to set the record straight. This is apart from the questions asked by the hon. member for Welland, which I think concentrated on the point as to why the minister was so reticent last year and what are the plans for this year. Here are some of the points I should like to put to the minister. Mr. Berton says: The more I think about this project, the more insane it sounds. But that is exactly why it has sparked so much interest. It is so wacky, so unlikely, so off-beat, that everybody wants to go.
This article goes on:
Sedentary types who normally wouldn't be caught farther afield than the Four Seasons motel are now coming up to me and saying, fiercely: "I've just got to go!"
Of course where they are going is up to the Yukon. Apparently an entire Broadway company is going up there to put on a new musical that is, I gather, an adaptation of the famous Ben Jonson play about gold and greed called Volpone. Again, this is such an imaginative thing that I wonder why the minister has been so discreet and reticent about it. How often does a Broadway musical come to Canada and, of all places, Dawson City in 1962? Why this mystery; why this cloister that has been placed around it by the government? It seems out of keeping with the past behaviour of this government.
I have never known such modesty and at the same time such imagination, because Mr. Berton goes on to say:
Of course, all this is tentative, Broadway musicals being what they are. But contracts have been signed and the book is being written. I'd say there is at least a two to one chance of pulling it off.
So the odds are pretty good. He goes on:
I hope so because the department of northern affairs has spent something like $200,000 completely restoring Arizona Charlie's famous Palace Grand dance hall just for the occasion.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether the hon. gentleman would permit me to ask him a question?


Douglas Mason Fisher: Yes.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Would he interpret this as free enterprise or socialized entertainment?


Douglas Mason Fisher: I like to draw my own moral at the end of my remarks. If the hon. member will wait I will try to do that. I did want to go on to this-


William Moore Benidickson: The same price to everybody.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Berton also says:
This is probably more than Charlie spent on it, since he built it from the remains of two steamboats.
Was the Minister of Public Works consulted in this business? It seems to me that if this is a complete rebuilding job-I understand there are a lot of old steamboats up around that area-knowing the vigilance of the Minister of Public Works, this seems an ideal project for him. Anyway, Mr. Berton goes on:
The department's sleuths have been combing archives and writing old vaudevillians in order to reproduce the decor exactly as it was when the dance hall was built in the spring of 1899. The exterior was completed and the building closed in before the cold weather started last fall and the interior decorators are now at work on the final touches. The restoration of other buildings will depend on private funds which so far have been slow in coming in.
I think we need to ask the minister what assistance he has been giving in bringing in private funds. I gather that the government has accepted the responsibility of building up Arizona Charlie's place but the rest is going to be filled in by private enterprise. This leads me to the point that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate mentioned. I can look at the roads program and all the other parts of the vision of the north, and always the call is that the government shall go in and lay the ground work and the basis for private enterprise. I want to ask the minister, is this project consistent in the same way, and is it also a constructive part of the vision? It seems to me it would be worth while knowing that.
Further on Mr. Berton gives a resume of what is going to be included in the tour. He sets out the Gold Nugget tour for the first, second and third days. I was just stunned, again, at the reticence in this. I cannot find mention of a single political speech in here.
I want to ask the minister, does he mean to say that after an expenditure of some 200,000 bucks on a place like this there is not going to be a politician there to open it or at least make a few remarks?


John Whitney Pickersgill: It will be the first opening the Prime Minister has missed.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I want to know more about this. The concluding paragraph of Mr. Ber-ton's article is as follows:
Crazy or not, the Dawson city gold rush festival is likely to make its mark as one of the most imaginative undertakings of its kind in Canada-
I see the minister nodding. This all becomes part of the vision. Again I ask, why this modesty up to now? Mr. Berton goes on:
-a genuine attempt to make use of our own history and natural resources and to provide something for visitors that cannot be obtained elsewhere. It is not a money making proposition, of course, and, indeed,-
And here is the question again, this nagging one:
-unless further funds are subscribed from the public it's possible that it could founder.
Does this mean that private enterprise is not coming through? This article is several weeks old and Mr. Berton may not be up on things, but I think we need a report from the minister on how private enterprise is responding to this government initiative. Mr. Berton concludes:
So if you have any rich old uncles who would like to underwrite the restoration of an historic building or so, drop me a line. This is one of the cradles of our gaudy past. It would be a shame to see it crumble into dust for lack of public interest.
This exciting description of the festival, the project and the government's role appeared in what I have always heard government members refer to as "that Liberal newspaper", the Toronto Star. Here is a Liberal newspaper, through one of its most noted correspondents, publicizing in tremendous fashion a part of the northern vision, and we have had an inadequate response-I think we can criticize the minister for this-from the government in this regard.
I asked this simple little question and I thought it might elicit some interesting details. I have seen it happen before that a person will ask a question and a minister will take off. The Postmaster General, I am sure, knowing his capacity and sense of advertising, would have done so. I cannot quite understand why I received such a terse answer in this regard. For this reason I would like to support the hon. member for Welland in the questions he has put, and I hope we will have a further explanation of the government's role in this project and what its future looks like at the present time.
I really cannot ask for this, but I would like to suggest to the minister that if there is a moral question involved in all this, as seemed to be adumbrated by the hon. member for Welland, I think the committee would appreciate his comments; because it is not too often that we have the opportunity to receive
Supply-Northern Affairs a moral judgment upon Canadian history. In this particular case I think we would all be delighted to have the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources tell us his own views on this festival and the part his department has played in giving leadership to private enterprise.


The Chairman:: The hon. member for Grey-Bruce.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, before the minister replies there are one or two observations I would also like to make on the-


Paul Raymond Martineau: Order. I have recognized the hon. member for Grey-Bruce.


Mr. Winkler:: I do not wish to take up the time of the committee for long. I certainly do not intend to reply to the points which have just been raised, but I would judge from the contribution made by the last two hon. members that there must have been some very strong local emotion attached to the restoration of this saloon or hotel up north, Arizona Charlie's; and if it is ever made available to the public for public use I should be surprised if in some subsequent political campaign we do not see some billing like "Tonight we present Wild Walter from Welland" or maybe "Dangerous Doug from Port Arthur". Time will tell.
My remarks will not be along those lines at all. I should like first of all to compliment the minister on the efforts which were made on behalf of Canada at the resources for tomorrow conference held in Montreal last fall.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am rising on a point of order. We are discussing an item having to do with the construction and acquisition of buildings in connection with national parks and historic sites. You recognized the hon. member, Mr. Chairman, no doubt because you assumed he had a valuable contribution to make in connection with the subject under discussion. The hon. member is now going on to discuss something which has nothing to do with this item. There are some of us who are interested in this Arizona Charlie and in the effort to restore him, and I feel this is one occasion when the rules should be strictly observed and that we should be permitted to deal with this item before we go on to discuss other items which do not appear to be comprehended in the estimates at all.


Eric Alfred Winkler: I shall get to my point very soon, and I shall only say to the hon. member from Bonavista-Twillingate that if he would refer to the discussion of supplementary estimates during the last 12 days or so he would see that it is surely ridiculous for him to bring up such a point of order as this. I will get to my point immediately-

Supply-Northern Affairs


Paul Raymond Martineau: Naturally the discussion must centre on the item, and I expect the hon. member will be relating his remarks to the item.


Eric Alfred Winkler: Most certainly. The reason I mentioned the resources for tomorrow conference was this. Out of that conference came some results which will be beneficial to the people of Canada with regard to parks. I regret very much that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate does not want to allow just a minute for another member of the committee to get to his point, though he takes hours at other times.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Take whatever time you like.


Eric Alfred Winkler: I will speak of this matter in relation to my own province of Ontario. In Ontario we have an organization known as the Federation of Ontario Naturalists. Representatives of that organization attended the Montreal conference, being interested in the establishment of parks, regardless of under what authority. I am speaking today simply because in the past I have had the pleasure of trying to persuade the minister's department to become interested in the particular area of Ontario in which I live and in other areas immediately adjacent to my constituency.
I speak of the shores of lake Huron and Georgian bay. I indicated on a previous occasion that these are excellent park sites. Off the Bruce peninsula exists the only national park, I believe, in the province of Ontario. I am aware that since 1958 the minister's department spent, in connection with the parks program, some $3.5 million in the province of Ontario for the establishment of camp grounds and picnic areas. These facilities are certainly used to tremendous advantage, and that is apparent even in my own area.
I do believe, however, that because of the importance of preserving it for posterity the establishment of the area I have referred to as a national park should be taken under consideration. When we read the requirements of the department with regard to such parks we realize that this would be a worthy project and that it should be undertaken before it is too late, if it is not already too late. I should like to read these requirements into the record:
The national park system, Is a resource. Like timber or minerals the national park resource has value to man only when it is made useful to man. Parks differ from other resources, chiefly in the nature of their products. Mines and commercial forests yield material products required by the nation. Parks yield the products of knowledge, refreshment and aesthetic enjoyment equally

required by all people. The only way these products can be obtained and the supply assured is through intelligent and appropriate use of park resources by people.
Maintaining the park unimpaired, or preserving it, is a very real part of our obligation. Preservation and use are not irreconcilable. The basic park values are supplied by the natural scene undamaged and unimpaired. To change the character of the park scene or to modify or impair the natural environment, destroys a part of its capacity to yield those benefits to the visitor.
In the area to which I have referred there are many of these characteristics which are worthy of being retained, but I fear that in the near future they will be destroyed through unscrupulous development by speculators if the government does not take the opportunity which exists at the moment. The membership of the Federation of Ontario Naturalists is well aware of these dangers. Very recently the organization, with the co-operation of its members, established a trail which will be known as the Bruce trail extending from the Niagara peninsula northward to the tip of the Bruce peninsula. This endeavour is being promoted by Mr. D. E. B. Webster, the managing director of the F. O. N., and part of the trail will be available for public use this year. If the representations which I have made to the department in the past had been followed-and I ask that they be reviewed and put into effect, if possible, in the near future-this trail will terminate at such a park site. The only park which exists at the moment is at the top of Bruce point, and this is where the trail would end.
I understand the minister is now prepared to extend the recreational park system to all the provinces on a co-operative basis, and I ask him to press for the extension of this park program before the land that is available is taken by speculators. I ask him particularly to consider the previous recommendations I have made to him in this regard.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Before I begin what I wish to say about Arizona Charlie, in view of the intervention of the hon. member for Grey-Bruce I would just like to draw Your Honour's attention to a libelous reference to this committee-and I use the word "libel" in its true sense-which appeared in an editorial in last night's Ottawa Journal. It said:
A small rump of his party-
That is Mr. Pearson's party, the Liberal party.
-remaining in the house were holding up supplementary estimates-taking 14 days for a job which usually takes up not more than three or four days.
The hon. member for Grey-Bruce has just demonstrated who has been taking up a very large part of the time in this committee. There have been more speeches from the

Supply-Northern Affairs
Conservative side than from the Liberal side and the people of Canada deserve to know in these last 14 days, and it is about time the truth. What I wanted to do was to get the truth was stated.	to Arizona Charlie's-


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: He only spoke for five minutes and you spoke for two hours.


Paul Raymond Martineau: I think, first of all, that some semblance of order should be kept so those who have the floor may be heard. I believe that the remarks the hon. member just made are not directed toward the item.


Paul Joseph James Martin: They were just made in passing.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Well, I think the hon. member will admit that his remarks should be directed to the item. I therefore hope he will continue to discuss the item and the item alone.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I certainly will, sir.


Eric Alfred Winkler: On a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman, may I suggest that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate should go back one night previous, to Tuesday night's paper, and read the first letter to the editor. If he does so he will then have the answer he requires.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Order. Every hon. member who is recognized has the right to speak and make the remarks he feels he should make provided they are relevant and according to the rules. I am sure the hon. member who has the floor will do so and that those who follow him will do likewise.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I, of course, will comply with your ruling, sir, but I know you would expect me also to reply to the hon. member for Grey-Bruce who instituted a debate. I would make one observation and one observation only, that more supporters of the government than members of the official opposition have spoken on the supplementary estimates, and that is a statistical fact.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Order. That statement has been made by various hon. members on either side of the house. The Chair is not at all interested in hearing a discussion on that subject. All the Chair is interested in is that the discussion be strictly relevant to the item. I would therefore ask for everyone's co-operation so that the discussion may proceed on an orderly basis. I know that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate will abide by that ruling.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, Mr. Chairman, having corrected Mr. Grosart's propaganda I can now go on with the business before the committee. I simply wished to draw attention to it, sir, because it is an extraordinary misrepresentation that is going on in the country,


Mr. Woolliams:: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Am I being interrupted again, sir?


Paul Raymond Martineau: The hon. member for Bow River is rising on a point of order.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Mr. Chairman, surely the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, who has a great deal of experience in this house, should follow the direction of the Chair and adhere strictly to a discussion of the item before us.


Mr. Carter:: Is that all?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, Mr. Chairman, I must say there is no hon. member whose opinion on any subject will impress me more than that of the distinguished and elevated hon. member for Bow River. We know how much that hon. gentleman has done to raise the tone of public life in this country, and we are very glad to have him bring us all to order in this committee.


An hon. Member:: How about getting on?


John Whitney Pickersgill: An hon. gentleman asks me how about getting on, but hon. gentlemen opposite fail to ask supporters of the government when they are really not talking about the item at all how about getting on. They do not interrupt their own speakers, who take more time than we do.


Mr. Cardiff:: You have not started talking about it yet.


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, because the hon. member for Huron in that garrulous fashion of his keeps interrupting.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, there is no hon. member in any quarter of this House of Commons who wastes more of the time of this house than the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, sir, if the honourable and distinguished member for Huron were not the amiable gentleman he is I would have to raise a question of privilege about that, but we know the hon. gentleman does not mean it, that the milk of human kindness flows through his veins, and that he is just saying this for the record. I think we will leave it on the record along with Arizona Charlie's and Nigger Jim's as a record of the new heights to which this government has raised the northern vision.

Supply-Northern Affairs
When my friend the hon. member for Welland began speaking about the northern vision and then told us about this bar at Arizona Charlie's, I wondered whether that particular project was part of the northern vision conceived before or after the conceiver had been at the bar, because it does seem to me to be the kind of vision that only comes at that sort of time.
This whole question of the restoration of Arizona Charlie's-and I imagine Charlie was white; he might not have been, but I imagine he was-raises a very difficult problem for the Prime Minister which the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources will at once recognize. We, sir, in this parliament enacted a bill of rights, and surely we are not going to have discrimination against Nigger Jim. If we are going to spend a quarter of a million dollars restoring the palais de danse of Arizona Charlie we will have to spend an equal amount on Nigger Jim's just to show that we really believe in the principles of the bill of rights. I am not advocating that. I am just pointing out that that would be consistent with those lofty principles which were embodied by the Prime Minister in the bill of rights and commended to us and accepted by this house.
But I am wondering whether the conception came from another quarter, and I really think it is something we ought to inquire into when we have members of the government on the treasury benches spending the public money-I was almost tempted to say drunkenly, sir, but that would be out of order; nevertheless you can understand why I was tempted to say it-on a project of this kind as a so-called historic monument, a shrine. I just wondered whether perhaps the real conception was not in the fertile mind, the almost too fertile mind, of the rather underemployed Associate Minister of National Defence; because we remember the profession of political faith made by the associate minister in February of last year, just over a year ago. That was before he was promoting steel plants. At that time he was-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, sir, this is very relevant, as you will see in just a moment. The associate minister said:
"In my riding. I organize dances, fashion shows, and so on. Under the Roman empire, you know how the caesars ruled over their subjects, with bread and games. When no bread was available then games were organized.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, would the hon. gentleman identify what he is quoting from?


John Whitney Pickersgill: "You know that the federal government is unable to grant all kinds of favors."


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. member what he is quoting from?


John Whitney Pickersgill: "If there is no bread, then there will be games."
Apparently it is not just going to be games; it is going to be fun and games.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Horses on the payroll.


John Whitney Pickersgill: One quarter of a million dollars will be spent in what is now a small and historic village, a shrine, a "palais de danse", Arizona Charlie's place. That is what this government can do, but it cannot find jobs for more than half a million unemployed. It seems to me that with the kind of deficits we have, with the kind of situation the Minister of Finance is faced with, there are better ways to spend a quarter of a million dollars than on recreating a place which, according to what little information I have about it-and I must confess that I do not have the same taste in literature as my friend the hon. member for Welland, and I take his word for it- was a place where the poor fellows who went out in the creeks and found the gold were shaken down. If that is something that is worth another quarter of a million shaken out of the pockets of the Canadian taxpayers in order to perpetuate the memory, I think it is time we were finished with this government and with the northern vision which seems to have been distorted at Arizona Charlie's bar.
(Translation):


Mr. Fortin:: Fifteen minutes of nonsense. (Text):


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, I have heard three dissertations on the subject of grand Charlie's palace, "le palais de danse", as the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate referred to it, and I think it is just about time that these hon. gentlemen were brought out of orbit down to face reality again. As I listened to the extravagant language used, particularly by the last speaker, the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, I concluded that if I did not know him better I would almost suspect that he had been visiting Charlie's palace and had been too close to the bar; because the language was extravagant and beyond any sense of proportion.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Not as extravagant as the project.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Shut up; you had your turn.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: It is quite true that what is known as the Grand Palace theatre back in the early days might have been associated

with some of the activities outlined by the hon. member for Welland, but that was under a Liberal regime. Any restoration that is going on at the present time will, of course, be under a Conservative regime. I can assure all the hon. members who have spoken on this subject that every activity that takes place in the Grand Palace theatre will be highly respectable and for the edification of the thousands of tourists who are going to visit Dawson city in the current tourist season.
Actually I am very pleased that this subject has been raised in the House of Commons. As the hon. member for Port Arthur has intimated, there has not been too much publicity concerning this question, and there is a very good explanation for that fact. It is not because of undue modesty on the part of the minister. It is because only in the past few weeks plans have been completely formulated for the staging of what has become known now as the Dawson city gold rush festival. Hon. members have implied that this project was conceived by the government, or that the decision to restore the Grand Palace theatre as a shrine was that of the government. I do not know to what faith the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate belongs. However, for him to refer to this as a shrine indicates that he is indeed twisted in his thinking on historic sites.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was repeating what the hon. member for Welland said.


An hon. Member:: He who repeats is equally guilty.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Yes. This is an historic site pure and simple. Even the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate should be able to appreciate that point.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I rise on a question of privilege. It may be simple but certainly, judging from the description, it is not pure.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I said pure and simple. Let us not go back to its experience under a Liberal regime; let us stick to contemporary times. The decision to declare the Grand Palace theatre an historic site was made by a no less distinguished group than the historic sites and monuments board, which includes among its membership some of the most distinguished historians in Canada.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Perhaps it is jealousy that motivates the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Yes. It is not only jealousy. There was a sort of wistfulness in what the hon. member said.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am rising on a question of privilege.
Supply-Northern Affairs


An hon. Member:: Who is taking up time now?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am. I am rising on a question of privilege in a free parliament. The Minister of Justice, echoed by the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, accused me of jealousy.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I said "wistfulness".


John Whitney Pickersgill: "Jealousy" is now an unparliamentary word. Indeed, it is a vicious attack. We have read editorials from one end of this country to the other to the effect that when an hon. member is accused of jealousy, a vicious attack has been made upon him. In view of the attitude taken by hon. gentlemen on the other side of the chamber, I feel that word should be withdrawn by the Minister of Justice, if he has any sense of justice and any sense of fair play. I say that in view of the tremendous fuss his friends made when an hon. member on this side of the chamber suggested that an honourable and distinguished member on the other side of the chamber was guilty of jealousy. Personally I would not worry about it, Mr. Chairman, but I am suggesting that the same treatment be given to both sides of the chamber.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I do not wish to prolong this discussion. What I said was that it is probably jealousy that motivates the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate. If he finds that his sensitivity will not absorb that remark, I shall be glad to withdraw the word "jealousy" and say "green eyed envy".


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I was just about to indicate that distinguished historians made the decision, as is the case in respect of all historic objects and sites that are designated as such. I refer to Dr. Creighton, Professor Lower and other men with very distinguished historical qualifications. I am afraid that my friend the hon. member for Port Arthur has misinterpreted completely the story of Pierre Berton. Actually the association of the department and the government in the Klondike or gold rush festival is quite incidental. Our only connection is the restoration of the Grand Palace theatre. The moving spirit behind this very imaginative project is Mr. Tom Paterson-who, a few years ago, was responsible for the establishment-and indeed I might use the word "creation"-of the Stratford festival. At the time Mr. Paterson conceived of the possibility of a Shakespearian festival being located in Stratford, Ontario, criticisms very much similar to those that have been raised in this chamber this afternoon were made against the project of those days.
2062	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs


Douglas Mason Fisher: May I just ask the minister a question at this point? He is not suggesting that my remarks were made in a spirit of criticism, I hope. I was just asking for information. I felt that one could really not criticize until one knew more about the project.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: When I referred to criticism I think perhaps I should have directed my remarks more to the hon. member for Welland and the hon. member for Bonavista-Twistingate; excuse me, I mean the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate. The organization behind this imaginative program is the Canadian Theatre Exchange Limited, which is known for its outstanding capacity in promotional efforts of this kind. In association with the Canadian Theatre Exchange a local organization, namely the Dawson city gold rush festival foundation, which is made up of citizens in Dawson city, is sponsoring the local arrangements.
Reference has been made to the appeal for funds in order to make this project a success. The membership of this fund raising committee includes men who have had faith in the north. That is more than our friends in the Liberal party have ever had.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Anything that has taken place in terms of northern development in recent years has been described as jumping "from igloo to igloo". That is a direct quotation from the Leader of the Opposition. More recently a Liberal senator has referred to Canadians in the north as ignorant Eskimos.
I merely point this out this afternoon as an indication-


Paul Joseph James Martin: Let us not get
political.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: -that they have a completely biased and twisted viewpoint toward the possibilities of the development of Canada's north. The men who are sponsoring this project are hard headed business men who have gone into the Yukon territory and developed the mining activities which during recent years resulted in an upsurge of development in all parts of northern Canada.
However, what has occurred here this afternoon I feel will be of immense benefit to the festival. The one quantity that it has lacked was sufficient publicity. I am sure the remarks of the hon. members will have drawn attention to the significance of this project. Having listened to the hon. members on the subject I am quite convinced that, along with the 40,000 other people who it is anticipated will visit the festival between July 1 and the middle of August, we shall find the hon. member for Port Arthur, the


hon. member for Welland and even the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate wending their way down the Alaska highway into the north in order to come into contact with the realities of the north for the first time.


William Hector McMillan: I do not think the minister answered too many of the questions I asked him. What is the total cost of this project?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: This question had already been submitted by the hon. member for Port Arthur some weeks ago and, while I have not the figure before me, I think it was around $200,000.
May I say that this is an historic restoration, as a result of which this gold rush festival has already developed. This is the sort of activity that has put our Canadian tourist industry in the front rank as a dollar earner in Canada. I am sure the hon. member for Welland is aware of the impact on the economy of the Upper Canada Village development. This is a project of similar proportion. I think the hon. member would be better advised to be promoting some of the historic restorations that are being undertaken in his part of the country, such as the Welland canal project, rather than criticizing an imaginative project of this kind.


William Hector McMillan: I was just asking for information, I was not criticizing. It was $200,000, was it?


The Deputy Chairman:: Order. I recognize the hon. member for Grey North.


Mr. Noble:: I am going to make a few observations, but I assure the minister that I am not going to take too much of his time. In listening to the discussion that has taken place and the remarks made by members of the opposition, I felt that Erik Nielsen and Dawson city are going to be grateful for the publicity given them in kicking off this project. I feel it is going to mean many thousands of tourist dollars for this area.
We have in Grey county the highest point of land in Ontario. It is 1,735 feet above sea level. This is the great watershed of a vast territory of western Ontario. This great ridge, which embraces approximately 40,000 acres, should be completely reforested. Much of the territory adjacent to this natural divide and fountainhead of many Ontario rivers is not suitable for economically sound agriculture, and many of the farms are now vacated. In my opinion this whole area should become a national park.
If the plan I have in mind were carried out it would assure the restoration of all the rivers stemming from this part of the province to their natural flow. This would embrace the Grand, the Humber and the Credit rivers, which flow south; the Saugeen, which flows

west, as well as the Beaver, the Bighead and the Sydenham, flowing into Georgian bay. Development of this area for the purpose of a national park would benefit many thousands of people. Located as it is, close to densely populated areas, it would be of great convenience to many people who have limited time and means for holiday trips and visits to our great natural outdoors.
The restoration of this area through reforestation and other projects necessary for park development would not only restore the natural beauty, but would in time restore water levels which more and more are becoming serious problems in all western Ontario. I believe I am correct in saying that we do not have a national park in the province of Ontario, other than Pelee island and possibly a few small islands in Georgian bay-


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is a very important park in a very important county, the county of Essex.


Percy Verner Noble: Thank you, sir. I do not know of a more logical area in which to establish a national park. Therefore I urge the minister to have a survey made in order that he might become more familiar with the area and its great possibilities. I am sure that he and his department will be impressed with what could be accomplished with a national park in Grey county and perhaps suitable adjoining areas.


Mr. Nixon:: I have one question for the minister before I deal with another matter. According to an answer delivered on February 14 to the hon. member for Port Arthur, the cost of restoring this Grand Palace theatre was $138,463 up to December 31, 1961. Has any money been expended since that time, or is that the total amount?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: As I indicated, there has been a continuing expenditure for this restoration. I would presume that the figure would now be around $200,000. I have not the total cost before me at this time, but I am sure my officials will bring me up to date in a moment.


George Ewart Nixon: We can have those official figures, then? The minister will recall that on several occasions I have raised the question of the restoration of the old stone house in Sault Ste. Marie. This building is roughly 150 years old. The minister has had an opportunity of visiting it himself, I believe. A sum of $35,000 was appropriated for this purpose but has been deleted from the estimates for 1961-62. I wonder if the minister could say whether there have been any further developments with regard to the purchase of this building or its restoration.
Supply-Northern Affairs


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: It is quite true that the hon. member has been interested in this subject for the past several months. I appreciate his support for historic objectives of this kind. So many of the members of this committee seem to fail to appreciate that the government does have a responsibility in commemorating and marking those areas in Canada which have an outstanding historic significance and which might properly be classified as national historic sites. The government has been increasingly active in this field during the past few years. There was tremendous neglect in commemorating these areas, and many of them were lost forever as a result of this neglect.
I can assure the hon. member that so far as the old stone house at Sault Ste. Marie is concerned, I have been in correspondence with the local officials. Certain proposals have been made to the city officials, and we are at this moment awaiting a reply from that source. Actually I think it is possible to say that we have made a certain offer to the city of Sault Ste. Marie, and as soon as we hear from the city we can continue our negotiations in respect of this historic site.


Mr. Nielsen:: I feel I should say a word or two about the restoration plans for the Grand Palace theatre, since this building lies within my riding. I was not surprised to hear the derisive and ridiculing remarks of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, because these are the type of remarks we can expect as a result of the half consideration the opposition gives to northern development as a whole.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is wholly inaccurate; nobody has done more for northern development that has the Liberal government.


Erik Nielsen: Ever since 1958, when the party on the other side of the house put forward a non-confidence motion on the introduction of plans for northern development, there has been a constant program of ridicule, scorn and derision directed at northern development by the members of the opposition. Forty per cent of Canada lies above the 60th parallel, and that part of Canada also has a history.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: The Liberals don't know that.


Erik Nielsen: Millions and millions of
dollars have been contributed to the national economy by the Yukon territory, and by this particular area alone. The restoration of this theatre is an integral part of an over-all plan for resurrecting the atmosphere of the days of '98 for the attraction of tourists, and for
20G4	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs the restoration of a part of Canada that has played a very important role in the development of our nation.
Because of the type of remarks which have come from the hon. member for Port Arthur in times past, I was not surprised to hear him ridicule and criticize this program of the department with respect to the restoration of the Grand Palace theatre for the Yukon gold rush festival. This is not surprising at all, I suggest that hon. members opposite would feel that the establishment of a national park in Yukon territory would also be a waste of money.
I suppose they would feel it is not in the interests of the national economy to attract tourists to the north, but I must differ with them. The government, in comparison with the over-all effort which is being put into the success of the Dawson city gold rush festival, is a small partner. There is a very active Dawson city festival foundation which had been in existence for almost two years and which is comprised of local residents in the Yukon territory. Just last February in Whitehorse we put on a winter carnival to raise funds to ensure the success of the festival. Mr. Alan Anderson, who is president of a large mining venture in Canada and has been an active mining man in the north for many years, is head of the fund raising campaign to ensure the success of the carnival. As a matter of fact only last night a fund raising dinner was held in Toronto. These are some of things which are being contributed by the private organizations that have been established in order to ensure the success of the festival.
The remarks of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate with respect to the festival and the attraction of tourists to the area are but a small example of his continued disinterest in northern Canada generally. I would like to enlighten the hon. gentleman in regard to what a very respected organization in the United States has to say concerning the tourist potential of the Pacific northwest, and particularly the Yukon. I speak of the international rail and highway commission and the Battelle report, which has this to say:
The growing importance of visitors from outside the area, both now and in the future, cannot be overemphasized for a number of reasons: northwest America is the last remaining frontier on the North American continent:	its scenery is
magnificent, its wildlife is a sportsman's dream; money spent by tourists is at the retail level, whether for goods or services and filters down through the entire economy.
-Tourism is a big business in many parts of the world, and it could become big in northwest America.
The commission believes that tourism can be greatly expanded ... Battelle forecasts almost a 

fivefold increase in expenditures by travellers of $380 million annually by 1980, which would support an additional 20,000 workers-
For the benefit of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate and his remarks about unemployment.
-and result in an increase in population of about 125,000.
Tourism is big business, and this investment that our minister of northern affairs has supported in connection with the restoration of the Grand Palace theatre is a good investment. It is one that will encourage tourism in the north. As I say, it is only a small part of the effort which is going into the creation of a successful festival in the Yukon territory which no doubt will attract hundreds of thousands of tourists to that area.
The hon. member should remember that the Alaska highway runs through the Yukon territory, and there is a ferry system being inaugurated along the Panhandle. There a great new system of communications thrusting through the Yukon, so apart from the obligation which I feel the nation has in remembering the historic part which the Yukon territory has played and is continuing to play in the nation's development, I believe that the hon. member's remarks in belittling this project are entirely out of place.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Last evening I happened to mention that I intended to make a full scale attack on the administration of the superintendent of Revelstoke park, and I am just going to make a few comments now as I have to go and broadcast my words of wisdom to the people of southeast British Columbia. Since I spoke last night I have received further information and have spent a period of meditation, with the result that I decided to change my tactics from that of full scale attack to one of encirclement by placing questions on the order paper, by eliciting information from departmental officials and by consulting with local people who are interested.
However, before taking any set course I want to ask the minister one question. I have been reliably informed by local residents that it is the practice of the local superintendent and senior officials to have the park employees cut their wood for their winter use. One man came to me and said they filled the superintendent's woodshed with fir to feed his open fireplace, but Mrs. Superintendent did not like it so the boys had to take it out again, go back in the woods and fill the woodshed with birch. I want to ask, does this come within departmental regulations?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I am sure the hon. member wishes to be entirely fair on this matter-


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I do.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: And I think the question arises possibly as the result of misunderstanding, because it is the practice of the department as is the case with other departments, for instance with respect to military personnel, to supply fuel and heat to departmentally operated homes. The wood in question was salvaged from the slash on mount Revelstoke.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: That is correct.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: And is being used for staff house requirements, as well as public camp grounds, picnic areas and so forth. It was not wood specifically for the superintendent's residence. A load was delivered to the house, but because it had been prepared primarily for use in kitchen shelters it was cut too small for use in the fireplace. This wood was therefore taken to the stockpile; the next load brought down was a longer length, suitable for use in the superintendent's fireplace, and everybody was happy.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I trust, Mr. Chairman, that I will be allowed very briefly the same latitude that was allowed to the hon. member for Yukon. I have nothing further to say at the present time about the "palais de danse", nor have I anything to withdraw.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Are you going to the festival?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. member made some observations on what I said about the festival, but at no stage in my remarks did I mention the festival at all. I sincerely hope it is a success, all the more so as we have a very large stake of the taxpayers' money to recover. But what I am going to do is take issue, in the interests of history and truth, with what the hon. gentleman said about the northern vision. The hon. gentleman talks as though the north had been discovered in 1958 by the present Prime Minister of Canada.


An hon. Member:: It was.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That, of course, simply shows that hon. gentlemen were paying no attention whatever to public affairs before that time; because everybody who does know anything about public affairs knows exactly from where the present Minister of Agriculture produced the northern vision. For the benefit of some of the more ignorant members of the committee who do not know, I am going to tell them where it came from. When the old department of mines and resources was divided into three
Supply-Northern Affairs departments, Mr. Winters became the minister of resources and development and laid the foundations for the modern development of the north-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -and when he was succeeded by Mr. iLesage, who is now the premier of Quebec, the government changed the name of that department to the department of northern affairs, increased the budget enormously and laid down the blueprint for everything that has been done since by hon. gentlemen opposite.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Those are the facts, and-


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


John Whitney Pickersgill: When I have concluded.


Paul Joseph James Martin: After five o'clock.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I simply want to get these facts consecutively on the record. The northern vision which was produced by the Prime Minister was extracted from the files of the department of northern affairs by the present Minister of Agriculture. I give that great publicist every credit for it; it was a terrific job of publicity. In fact he should not be called the Minister of Agriculture at all; he should be called the minister of publicity, because there is no more clever propagandist anywhere than the Minister of Agriculture. There are many people who can make bricks without straw-


Mr. Denis:: Especially the Postmaster General.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -but the minister can create castles with words. The unfortunate part of it is that when the words collapse the castles are no longer there, in many cases. The plain fact is that there has been progress in the north in the last five years. Why? Because the plans were there, and they were partly executed. That is why there has been progress in the north, and it is just about time that these inflators of words, these hon. gentlemen who substitute words for deeds-


Mr. O'Hurley:: It is time you sat down.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -in every aspect of government, had the record set straight for them.


Frank Charles McGee: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member said he would answer a question at the conclusion of his remarks. Will he accept the question now?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Certainly.


Frank Charles McGee: The hon. gentleman has just been describing a situation in which he said

Supply-Northern Affairs the planning shelves of the previous administration were fairly bursting with activities just ready to be undertaken. I am wondering if those shelves were as empty as the shelf upon which the great plans for public works were supposed to be kept.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not know what that silly question means, but I do know that in 1956 a filibuster was carried on in this house to prevent one of the greatest works that was ever undertaken in this country. Fortunately that filibuster failed and that pipe line was built, otherwise we would have had a much worse recession in 1958 than we had.


Frank Charles McGee: I will tell the hon. member precisely what that question is all about, because he and his colleagues stumped this country in the latter part of the 1950's telling the people that there was a shelf of public works and activities ready to be undertaken in case of a recession, and in 1957 there was nothing on that shelf, as the hon. member knows.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Nothing but 12 years of full employment.


Mr. Henderson:: Mr. Chairman, there is a road called the Alaska highway that runs 1,000 miles or more through the territory I come from. It leads to Dawson, where this wonderful festival is going to be held that will mean millions and millions of dollars being spent in that part of the country. My people would think I was dead if I did not say something about that. I am going there this summer.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We are all going.


Walter Clarence Henderson: I am pleased to hear you are going to be there too.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We are all going, particularly we who have done so much to promote this.


Walter Clarence Henderson: Hon. gentlemen talk about spending money. Think of the millions of dollars that were taken out of that country. I love to recite, even to myself, about Dan McGrew, pitched on his head and pumped full of lead. That is a real country; real people live there. I had better not say too much about that.
When you come up, come through my territory. It is 1,000 miles or more of the most wonderful country you ever saw, the Cariboo. The old boats are lying there; they are being fixed up and waiting. You will have a wonderful time, and while the lady known as Lou may not be there-


An hon. Member:: Don't go too far.


Walter Clarence Henderson: No, I will not do that.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We want to make sure that the man called Gus is there.


Walter Clarence Henderson: He will be there. I have been 50 years in that north country. I am proud of it and I love the north.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Erik Nielsen: Mr. Chairman, I hope you will allow me the same latitude that you allowed the hon. member for Bonavista-Twil-lingate in the remarks he imposed on this committee. Before the hon. member spoke I simply dealt with a very backhanded slap that he took at the policies of this government in developing the north. I say to you, sir, and to all hon. members of this committee that what the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has said about increasing the budget of the department of northern affairs, about the activities of the Liberal administration when they had control of the department, about this so-called huge backlog of plans that they had, about the present Minister of Agriculture swiping those plans, making publicity and political capital out of them, all those statements are a blatant misrepresentation of the facts.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Sir, on a question of
privilege, I made a statement on my responsibility as a member of this house, but not just as a member of this house. I was a privy councillor, I was a member of the government, I was a member of treasury board. Anybody who cares to examine the public accounts or the estimates for those years will find that what I said about the increase in expenditure is absolutely accurate, notwithstanding the characteristic remark of the hon. member for Yukon.


Erik Nielsen: I suppose that is why the three bridges across the three main rivers of the Yukon were turned down three times by the privy council of which the hon. member was a member.


Mr. Bell (Carleton):: Is that what the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate would call from igloo to igloo?


Mr. Baldwin:: Mr. Chairman, I have been very interested in this debate. I had a particular interest in what was said by the hon. member for Cariboo. He said he would be there next summer when this festival is held. May I add, because of some of the comments which have been made by members of the opposition, that after the next election he will also be here. There has also been some comment on the question of northern development. Because of the extent of the attacks by members of the opposition in this regard I wish to point out that actions speak louder than deeds-


Mr. Bell (Carleion):: "Words".


Gerald William Baldwin: Actions speak louder than words. When the bill preceding the legislation in respect of one of the foundation plans for northern development, the Pine Point railroad, was before this house last session, hon. members of the opposition voted against it on two occasions. On one occasion they voted for a six months' hoist.


Gordon Campbell Chown: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. gentleman. Hon. members realize that I have allowed a fair amount of latitude in this debate, and I hope I have not asked for difficulties in so doing. The reference by the hon. member for Peace River to the Pine Point railway is, I think, all together out of order when you consider the item which is before the committee.


Gerald William Baldwin: I accept your ruling. I felt I had to make some observation, however, in view of what has been said.
This item covers some aspects of provision for national parks, historic sites and monuments and I would make this suggestion to the minister-that having in mind the opposition which has been put forward by both the official opposition and by the C.C.F.-N.D.P. to this appropriation and other matters of northern development it might be well for him in the course of his duties to set apart certain historic monuments upon which at a later date he might hope to place some of the few remaining members of the opposition parties who will be around after the next election as a result of the opposition which they have put forward.
I wish to endorse what has been said by the minister and by the hon. member for the Yukon in connection with this project in Dawson city. The road into this area goes through the Peace River area for a distance of several hundreds of miles. One day last summer, driving from Edmonton toward Grande Prairie I saw a large number of cars with United States licences. Indeed, I estimated that two thirds of the cars on that highway were cars from the United States on their way to Alaska. As the hon. member for the Yukon has said, when the Alaska highway becomes of particular interest to the government of the United States and ultimately is paved-it is not a question of "if" but a question of "when"-the amount of traffic going into that area will be fantastic. I commend the minister and those in his department who have taken an interest in this matter for setting up programs which will attract these tourists off the highway into Dawson city and other parts of the Yukon. I think the time will come when we shall appreciate what the minister and his department have
Supply-Northern Affairs done, and what other people who are interested have done in connection with projects of this nature.
I also want to say to the minister that I have watched with sympathy and understanding his efforts to dedicate and set aside areas in this country for recreational purposes. I think it is essential at this time in the development of our country when we still have these large areas available, many miles remote from settlements, that we should take the opportunity to preserve them before it is too late. We should take this opportunity while it is available at a relatively low cost and avoid the difficulties which have arisen with the United States where it has become increasingly hard to find space for recreational purposes for the rapidly increasing population.
I commend the minister for visiting the district which I represent and flying into an area which has been proposed as a national park site-the so-called Moncton pass district. I realize it lies completely outside the minister's authority to do anything about this until the government of British Columbia has dedicated this area for use by the national government as a park, but I think his interest is most worth while and I hope he keeps up his good work in that regard.
Included among the parks under the jurisdiction of the minister is the Wood Buffalo park, one of the largest in this country; in fact I believe it is the largest on this continent. Some 15,000 square miles of this park lie within the geographical borders of the province of Alberta. I know that a motion recently made in the legislative assembly in Alberta calls for that part of the park which lies within the province of Alberta to be turned over by the federal government to the province of Alberta. Part of this park lies within my own constituency. A large part lies within the constituency of the hon. member for Athabasca with whom I have discussed this matter from time to time. This park is the summer home of the almost extinct whooping crane. In this park are some 16,000 wood buffalo, probably the largest herd of these animals still in existence. I would be most reluctant to see this government take any hasty action, should this particular notice of motion in the Alberta legislature be accepted and should it become a matter of government policy in that province to urge this particular course. It may well be that the park is so large and of such a nature that certain areas might be carved out and made available for industrial development, though I must say I would view this with some misgivings. Such proposals would require examination and assessment by those who are better qualified to reach an opinion with regard to them than I am. I bring this

Supply-Northern Affairs to the attention of the minister and his officials because it appears as though this action in the province of Alberta may be of some significance. While I do not oppose this suggestion I urge that a most careful and detailed examination should be made by this government before its adoption is considered. We can ill afford to be deprived of these areas to which our people must resort for recreational purposes.


Azellus Denis: I should like to say just a word in disagreement with my hon. friend from Bonavista-Twillingate who said that the minister of northern affairs should be called the minister of publicity.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The former minister.


Azellus Denis: I wish to defend the minister, and I do so on the grounds that this title belongs to the Postmaster General and has done so for a long time.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I apologize to my hon.
friend. He is quite right.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I do not rise to prolong this discusion. I wish to raise another matter. X would simply like to say that when we talk about our interest in the northern regions of Canada it will be difficult to contest the statement of record as given my hon. friend from Bonavista-Twillingate.
There is no doubt that it was under the administration of Mr. St. Laurent that a separate department of northern affairs was established under the responsibility of the present premier of Quebec. It is also well known that the former prime minister indicated his own very deep interest in northern development by observations made in this house on a number of occasions while he was prime minister. Those of us who served with him in government know that he, perhaps more than any other living Canadian, deserves to be regarded as the statesman who gave emphasis to the importance of the development of the northern regions of our country. It will be difficult to contest that both Mr. St. Laurent as prime minister and Mr. Lesage as the first minister in charge of the department took a deep interest in the development of this part of the country.
As minister of national health and welfare I knew a good deal about the initiative which was taken by Mr. Lesage. As my hon. friend knows, much of the development had to do with some very important decisions which were taken at that time with regard to northern health services as administered by the Department of National Health and Welfare. When we are talking about those to whom credit should be given it would be difficult to deny the contributions made

by Dr. Percy Moore. That was all under a regime other than the present one.


Mr. Graffley:: Would the hon. member permit a question? I ask this question in all sincerity. Would the hon. member who has just mentioned Mr. Lesage reconcile Mr. Le-sage's present position in relation to the power grid program in the meeting of provincial premiers with the position he took when he occupied the portfolio of northern affairs?


Paul Joseph James Martin: If I were to answer that question I would, of course, be out of order just as my hon. friend was in putting the question.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: The hon. member has unanimous consent to answer.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The fact is that I think it is generally recognized that Mr. Lesage did play an important part as minister of northern affairs in pursuing policies of the administration of which he was a member, and Hansard of that period will attest to what I have said. I can say as one of his colleagues there is no one-


Erik Nielsen: Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. member a question?


Paul Joseph James Martin: -in my judgment since who has shown such a responsible understanding-I do not say a propaganda understanding and I am not referring to the present minister-in administering northern affairs. I am sure there was no one who had as vigorous, and intelligent an interest in the problems of that department as did the present premier of Quebec. That is a matter of record.


Erik Nielsen: May I ask the hon. member a question on that point?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Erik Nielsen: If what the hon. member is saying is an accurate reflection of the attitude of the head of the department at that time perhaps the hon. member could inform the committee why Mr. Lesage and his colleagues in the cabinet at that time consistently turned down proposals for bridges and roads in the north? There is an obvious discrepancy which I who lived there am conscious of because I witnessed this complete lack of development.


Mr. Marlin (Essex Easl):: Usually my hon. friend asks very intelligent questions but I am sure he will agree this is hardly one.


Erik Nielsen: But I should like an answer.


Murdo William Martin: Let me say that the government of which I was a modest and

humble member-and so there will be no question about my modesty I suppose I should add a relatively ineffectual member-built roads and bridges under the department established by Mr. Lesage to a degree that would warrant the view that not much more should be done.


Erik Nielsen: Where were the roads?


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend knows perfectly well. In addition to those I have mentioned-


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: They were from igloo to igloo.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The minister, who is a very fair-minded man, will not contest what I have said. It was under Mr. St. Laurent and Mr. Lesage that this northern vision really developed.


Walter Clarence Henderson: If you ask the man in the north, what would he tell you? He certainly would tell you that nothing was done under the previous government.


John Whitney Pickersgill: They did not say that when they elected a Liberal member for Mackenzie River in 1958.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am going to deal with my amiable friend from Cariboo in just a moment but he must wait until I reach him.


Walter Clarence Henderson: The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate said I was not here in 1958.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I did not say that.


Walter Clarence Henderson: I am sorry if I got you
wrong. Let me tell you that I was in the west and in the north.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps I could explain-


Paul Joseph James Martin: Perhaps the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate would permit me to conclude before answering the hon. member for Cariboo.
I am saying to the minister I am sure that he as a responsible minister and as an honourable man will not contest my statement that it was under Mr. St. Laurent and Mr. Lesage that the real beginnings of the concept of the northern vision were developed.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman-


Paul Joseph James Martin: Perhaps the minister would permit me to continue.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I thought the hon. member was asking me a question.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am attempting to complete my remarks before five o'clock. I am hoping to complete my little speech by
Supply-Northern Affairs that time. As hon. members know I do not often have an opportunity to speak in this chamber.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I am sorry, but I thought the hon. member was asking me a question.


Paul Joseph James Martin: This is all by way of parenthesis and has nothing to do with what I really wish to say. Having listened to what the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate said and as the only other member of the former government in the committee I thought it only appropriate that I should support the hon. gentleman in what he said in his very accurate historical review of the work of the department. In that connection I am sure we all recognize-*


Erik Nielsen: I don't.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am sure we all recognize that the late hon. member for Mackenzie River, Mr. Mervyn Hardie was one whose name will ever be associated with northern development. He was one of the supporters of this party. Day in and day out, as the minister knows, he gave evidence of his deep interest in the development of this important section of our country.
I rose to make this suggestion to the minister. He will recall that on February 6 I made representations to him and wrote to him about that time in connection with Banwell house near Windsor in Essex county. My hon. friend is, of course, aware of the Hiram Walker historical museum which serves a useful purpose in Windsor in Essex county. He is also aware of the museum in Amherstburg in the constituency represented by the hon. member for Essex South. These are all important attestations of the historic character of the county from which I come and in which is located the riding I have the honour to represent in this house.
The presentations I made to the minister arose from those made to me by Mr. George Marshall, Mr. Alan Douglas and Mr. Gordon F. Mann of the Essex county historical association. They had reference to Banwell house, which is one of the relics of French Canada in this historic part of our country.
Banwell house was discovered recently and in the field of architectural history it is a finding of importance to the history of the Windsor region and of Canada in general. The discovery means we have had survive a building erected in the French Canadian technique at a time when all such examples were thought to have disappeared from the Ontario scene. I am told that Banwell house and others like it that have so far come to light in Essex county differ substantially from their counterparts in the remainder of French Canada, and therefore to the best

Supply-Northern Affairs of present knowledge are believed to be unique in all of North American log construction. This example of this form of construction displays a high degree of craftsmanship.
Banwell house stands on the east side of Banwell road, north of No. 2 highway and has been identified as the Henry Banwell house.
The minister has promised to look into the representations made to have this set aside as a historic monument. I would add to my written and oral representations the following additional argument. Essex county is one of the most historic counties in the province of Ontario. It has a French Canadian population that goes back several centuries. The house in question is closely allied to the culture of Canadians of French descent in that section of the country and is of interest, as well, to others of various national origins. The house would be a valuable site in itself, but its preservation would also be a connecting link with a phase of the development of the culture of one of the two predominant ethnic groups in Canada. I believe the Ban-well house is one that deserves to be preserved. It is part of the pattern that has been built up in our county of developing an appreciation of historical events through historical monuments. I should like to think that the minister would find a way to support this proposal. I believe that, as a result of representations which I was able to make, the minister has made some arrangement for officials of his to contact members of the Essex county historical society. I would be grateful to know what progress has been made since these representations were first put forward, as I am sure would the people in Essex county.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I can assure the hon. member that particular proposal will be presented to the historic sites and monuments board when that board meets in May. I am sure that body of distinguished historians will give to the national historic aspects of this particular house the same careful consideration it gave to the Grand Palace theatre in Dawson city. While I am on my feet-


Paul Joseph James Martin: May I ask the
minister if it is a fact that someone from his department has already been in contact with the Essex county historical society?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Yes, we have been in touch with the local historical society.
Yesterday, the hon. member for Brantford made some worthwhile recommendations. Perhaps I could now reply to the points he raised, of which I think there were three. The Bell home has long been recognized as a significant historic place. I can assure him

that the historic sites branch have taken an active interest in the preservation of this home. They have been in touch, for example, with the local historical society and also with the Bell Telephone Company which naturally would have an interest in the preservation of this home. I am happy to assure the hon. member that the township in which the home is located has been assured of substantial support for the removal project when this becomes necessary. This support will be forthcoming from the Charles Fleetford Sise chapter, telephone pioneers of America. It is one of the functions of the historic sites branch to encourage local participation in the preservation of our historic sites. Not every historic site is of national significance. We feel that it is our responsibility to have local groups active in historic preservation, and to get the provinces active in this important function. In this particular instance there has been a good response from the local people.
The chapel of the Mohawk has also been very carefully looked into by the branch and the policy laid down reference to the preservation of all religious historic sites would apply in this case. We encourage the denominational bodies concerned to be active in the preservation of these old churches. In this case we are hoping for an encouraging response from the denomination under whose auspices the old Mohawk church has functioned.
Chiefswood, the birthplace of the Pauline Johnson, the daughter of the Mohawk chief, also has been under consideration by the historic sites branch. As a matter of fact, this matter has been looked at by the historic sites and monuments board and in 1961 it was decided that this was not one of those historic sites that come under the description of a national historic site. Again, there are other ways of attacking this problem, such as the creation of local interest and support. I am sure that the hon. member will be glad to know that there has been some commemoration of Pauline Johnson. A plaque has been established by the provincial historic sites people and also a stamp was issued by the Post Office Department in order to commemorate Pauline Johnson.


Gordon Campbell Chown: Shall vote 648 carry?


Chesley William Carter: I wish to ask just one question and it will take not more than a minute. I wish to ask the minister whether any consideration has been given to making Sentinel hill in Newfoundland an historic site. Sentinel hill overlooks the town of Placentia which at one time was the capital of Newfoundland at a time when our province was under the control of the French. On Sentinel hill was the fortification which protected the

town. It is wrapped or steeped in history going back hundreds of years. Many of our people feel that its claim as an historic site is equal to that of other places which have been included in the historic sites program.
I would ask the minister whether any consideration is being given to it.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: The department has been concentrating on Signal hill outside the city of St. John's in Newfoundland as the historic site in Newfoundland which should receive emphasis as a national historic site. So far as Sentinel hill is concerned, this matter has never come before the historic sites and monuments board so far as I know. I would rather imagine that this is the sort of historic commemoration that would come under the purview of the provincial authorities rather than the national authorities. In each province we try to have a major national historic site which would be genuinely regarded as being of national significance.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Gordon Campbell Chown: It being five o'clock it is my duty to leave the chair in order that the house may proceed to the consideration of private members' business, pursuant to section 3 of standing order 15.
Progress reported.


Mr. Speaker:: It being five o'clock the house will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely private bills, notices of motions-papers-and public bills. There being no private bills on the order paper, the house will first consider notices of motions, papers.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


John Whitney Pickersgill: That an order of the house do issue for a copy of the latest economic forecast prepared in the Department of Trade and Commerce in the series substituted for the Canadian Economic Outlook as described in Hansard for August 10, 1960 at page 7878.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I will not trouble to reread the motion which Your Honour has already read. For the benefit of those hon. members who were only elected in 1958, I think perhaps I should tell them what the Canadian Economic Outlook was.


Mr. Churchill:: No, Mr. Speaker, that is not part of the motion.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps I can be allowed to proceed, Mr. Speaker, without the assistance of the house leader.
22, 1962	2071
Economic Forecast for Current Year


Gordon Minto Churchill: I rise on a point of order. We are not in need of any explanation. Everybody can read. All the hon. member is asking for here is for an order of the house with regard to certain documents. We do not need a long explanation in this house with regard to what the documents are.


Mr. Crestohl:: What are you afraid of?


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is more closure.


Mr. Speaker:: I think the hon. member has not got far enough as yet to determine whether or not he is transgressing.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I will not waste time on the observations of the government leader. The Canadian Economic Outlook was a document which was published by the Prime Minister on January 20, 1958, as can be found by reference to Hansard. It had never been published before. It was a document prepared in secret-


Gordon Minto Churchill: I rise on my point of order, Mr. Speaker. This is precisely the matter to which I was drawing Your Honour's attention. Then hon. member now is going into the so-called history of some document or other. He was trying to explain what it was. Everybody knows or can find out from public records what the Canadian Economic Outlook is. He is continuing to bring in irrelevant material concerning the Prime Minister, and so on. This is my point of order, sir.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should like to say a word on the point of order before Your Honour rules, if I may be permitted to do so. When the change in the rules was made provisionally for this session to transfer these notices of motion from undebatable notices to debatable notices, it was presumably intended there should be a debate about something. It is obvious that no one can explain why a document ought to be produced without first explaining what the document is and why that document, under certain circumstances, is one which should be made public and not one which should be kept secret. This is exactly what I am endeavouring to do. I cannot give my arguments for the production of the document to which I am referring without identifying that document, and I cannot identify it, because it cannot be thoroughly identified, without reference to its predecessor.


Leon David Crestohl: That is elementary.


Mr. Speaker:: The point of order would have to be decided on the basis of the issue before the house. As I understand it, this motion calls for the house to order the production of a document described here, the production of which the government resists. The debate

Economic Forecast for Current Year is on the issue of whether or not the government is correct in resisting the production of the document. Now, anything that is relevant to that issue would, in my opinion, be relevant to the debate. At this moment, I do not believe we have gone beyond the scope of the debate.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Thank you, sir. This document which was published on January 20, 1958, was an economic forecast for the year 1957. It was a confidential document prepared by civil servants for the use of ministers and never intended to be published. It was prepared for the previous government. The Prime Minister saw fit, after he became the leader of the house, to make that document public.
Now, the government was greatly embarrassed by the fact the opposition-
Mr. Pallet!: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Order; the parliamentary secretary on a point of order.
Mr. Pallet!: I should like, Mr. Speaker, to refer to your own words uttered during this session and recorded at page 682 of Hansard during the debate on the first motion for the production of documents under the new rule. At that time Your Honour said, and I quote:
Before the hon. member proceeds further with that line of argument I think I should say to him that my view of the scope of the motion is that it is limited to the desirability of the production of the documents. The motion is one calling on the government to produce the documents referred to in the motion. The question in issue is whether or not they should be produced. Production of them has been objected to.


Mr. Robichaud:: Is this a new type of closure?


Paul Joseph James Martin: That does not help very much.


Mr. Palleit:: The hon. member for Gloucester seems to feel t hat the interpretation of the rules should be for one side of the house only. I assume that is what he thinks, from his interjection; but I am one of those who believe the rules should apply to all members of the house and that the orderly conduct of business requires the observance of them by every member of the house. I am raising this point of order in the proper way in which it should be raised, and if the hon. member wishes to argue the point he will have that opportunity.


Mr. Speaker:: May I ask the hon. member for his assistance in respect of his point of order? If the issue is, as indicated, whether or not it is desirable that this document be produced, whether it is confidential or in the public interest or any other proper ground

upon which objection is taken, would it not be relevant to the debate to indicate what use had been made of this document or similar documents in the past or what disposition had been made by this government and former governments of the document in the past? Would this not be relevant to the issue of what should be done at this time? That is the difficulty. As I say, the argument of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate is directed towards showing that this document now called for is the same as an earlier document under another name, and to show that certain use was made of that document, that certain publication of that document was made by the government, and that therefore the objection that it is in the public interest to withhold the document now falls to the ground on the basis of that precedent. If the hon. member for Peel feels that is out of order, I would be glad to consider the point.
Mr. Pallet!: In so far as the matter of relevancy is concerned, the document that was referred to as the Canadian Economic Outlook has always been produced the year after it was prepared. There was never any objection to that being produced.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Never.


John Cameron Pallett: The hon. member for Essex East says "never".


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is right.
Mr. Pallet!: He is like that never, never bird.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker. My question of privilege is that the hon. gentleman, under the guise of a point of order, is seeking to debate the very question I was seeking to debate when he interrupted me. If he wishes to debate it, he should take his turn.


Mr. Speaker:: Well, I think I cannot give effect to the objection. It seems to me the debate had better proceed along the lines on which it started.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Thank you, sir. As I say, this document was published by the Prime Minister on January 29, 1958 under circumstances that were rather dramatic. A couple of years later the government saw fit, and I can only assume it was because of their embarrassment in the matter, to discontinue this forecast. I will not go into that because I think it would be irrelevant. They introduced a new series of documents which were described at some length by the distinguished Minister of Trade and Commerce in Hansard at the page to which I referred. I put that reference in so that the document would be identified. It is quite clear that although the

document referred to by the Minister of Trade and Commerce is not precisely the same as the document that was formerly produced, because it has another name, it obviously was, according to the description, for the same purpose.
I will not attempt to summarize the arguments advanced by the Prime Minister on publication of that document on January 20, 1958. I intend to produce them in his own words from Hansard because the Prime Minister's words in Hansard are my argument for the production of this document at this time. The situation is completely analogous. That document was prepared in March, 1957, on the eve of an election. This document I am asking for has been prepared-at least so most people seem to think-on the eve of another election. Therefore every argument which the Prime Minister used in connection with the one applies equally to the other.
I would draw Your Honour's attention to Hansard of January 20, which Your Honour will not have forgotten, January 20, 1958, at page 3526, where the Prime Minister said:
-I put It to the hon. members opposite-every one of them in the official opposition-
That is, the members of my party.
-that they hid the facts; they concealed the record; they did not let the Canadian people know what was taking place.
Later on the same page he said:
You secured the advice of the economists in your own departments and were advised as to what the situation was in March 1957. This record was given to each and every one of you-
At which point the hon. Leader of the Opposition interjected and asked the hon. gentleman what he was reading from.


John George Diefenbaker: I thought the hon. gentleman knew of it before, but I am reading from the report "Canadian Economic Outlook" prepared by the economic branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce delivered in March 1957 at a time when my hon. friends opposite were telling the Canadian people how well things were going and were refusing to act.
How similar the situation is now to what the Prime Minister said it was then. Then, on page 3530 there is this sentence from the Prime Minister:
You concealed the facts. That is what you did.
Later on in the same column he said:
What did they do? They concealed the facts. They told the Canadian people that all was well; Utopia is here; there will be no more unemployment.


Gordon Minto Churchill: It is quite irrelevant to the argument you are making.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is the Prime Minister's argument. It may be irrelevant but it is not irrelevant to what I am talking about.
Economic Forecast for Current Year


Mr. Jones:: We did give the people the facts.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Later on, at the same page, Mr. Knowles said:
The Prime Minister did not hear my question. Has this document which the Liberals concealed been tabled? If not, will the Prime Minister table it so we can all see it?


John George Diefenbaker: I do not know that it has been. I would take it that it has, surely.
In other words, the Prime Minister felt it ought to have been tabled.
I would take it that it has, surely. If it has not been tabled my hon. friend has added one more example to the record of concealment by my hon. friends opposite.
Those were the arguments put forward by the present Prime Minister of the country as to why a document analogous to the document I am asking for, should have been made public by the government of that day at that time, and he accused us of concealing it, of hiding it. He took this thing onto the hustings and made a big issue of it. The Canadian people decided in his favour and presumably therefore gave their stamp of approval to what the Prime Minister did on that occasion.
I personally, if that precedent were not there, would never have made this motion. I made it only because the Prime Minister, who is supposed to be the supreme custodian of the rules and procedures of this house, said it was the right thing to do. If it was the right thing in his mind for the Prime Minister's predecessor to do, then surely the Prime Minister does not suggest that this government is governed by different principles and different rules of procedure? Surely if the Prime Minister's predecessor should have tabled this document and not hidden and concealed the facts, as he said he did, surely it is up to him to do it now under the same circumstances and on the eve of an election?
There is another argument and very good reason why this should be done. Hon. gentlemen opposite are going about the country talking about the great up surge in our economy. They are trying to give a certain impression about what this is. I am not saying that impression is right or wrong but they are doing that, and that is exactly what they said my friends and I did when we were in office in 1957. They are doing it now and they are refusing to let us have this document which would give us whatever evidence their experts might have in this regard.
If hon. members look at today's Gazette they will see this is very relevant. They will see that everyone in the country-I am not talking about politicians-does not agree with hon. gentlemen opposite.


Mr. Speaker:: I think-
2074	HOUSE OF
Economic Forecast for Current Year


Mr. Hees:: On a point of order-


Mr. Speaker:: I think the hon. member is going beyond the scope, but I shall hear the hon. minister.


George Harris Hees: If I may express my point of order, the hon. gentleman is asking for the production of a document which does not exist, and has not been produced during the last year and a half since I have taken over as Minister of Trade and Commerce. There is no report produced today. The economists of my department report to me periodically, verbally and otherwise, when I wish to know specific information about economic affairs in the country, so therefore-


John Whitney Pickersgill: This isn't a point of order.


George Harris Hees: -there is no document to produce such as the hon. member is asking for.


Mr. Speaker:: The minister will have an opportunity to indicate that as a matter of debate. It is not a point of order.


George Harris Hees: It just isn't there.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member is proceeding on the basis that there is such a document.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister of course, as we know in this house, suffers more from lapses of memory than most hon. members, and when my hon. friend from Essex East produces the record from Hansard that I mentioned in my motion, but which I did not produce because I did not want to take up the time of the house, the minister will find there is such a document and his face will be very red, as it has been very many times before.
The reason the document asked for should be produced is first because the Prime Minister said this is the right procedure for the government to take. Surely if it would have been the right thing for my right hon. friend, Mr. St. Laurent, to do five years ago it is the right thing to be done now? These were conclusive statements and hon. gentlemen opposite should be ashamed of themselves for arguing against their leader and objecting to the argument in view of the importance of what their leader spoke about so eagerly on that occasion.
In their own interest they should produce it because if they do not produce it everyone in the country will suspect it is just the kind of document which they said the other one in 1957 was, that in fact it forecasts the very things that are referred to in these two clippings from the Gazette, and far from supporting the minister's forecast hon. gentlemen opposite should be arguing in the opposite direction. I do not know what is in


it. I do not know whether it forecasts these things or not, but I say on the premises which the Prime Minister put before us that I have now read, and on the basis of the accusation which the right hon. gentleman made on that occasion, this document should be produced.


Gordon Minto Churchill: What document?


William Heward Grafftey: How can you produce that which does not exist?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I have now, sir, the reference and I have to say that it was the minister's predecessor.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, absolutely. You are wrong all the way through.


Paul Joseph James Martin: You are still a minister. What difference does that make?


Gordon Minto Churchill: It makes a lot of difference. There is no document now.


John Whitney Pickersgill: If the procedure established by the Minister of Veterans Affairs was so unsatisfactory that his successor changed that, again I do not know the facts but again I put the position as set out by the minister. He said this:
-I want to make it very clear that there has been no change in the giving of information by the economics branch to me and the transmitting of that information to the government where necessary. I have asked that monthly reports be sent to me from the economics branch and that periodic forecasts be given to me indicating what, in the opinion of our economists, lies ahead in the few months, or the remaining months, of the year. This has been done.
I assume that statement meant what it said, and all I am asking for in my motion is the latest economic forecast of the periodic forecasts that the former minister of trade and commerce, as reported at page 7878 of Hansard for August 10, 1960, said had been made in place of the Canadian Economic Outlook.


Gordon Minto Churchill: That would be September, 1960. Is that the one you want?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I asked for the latest one. If that is the latest one why did the government not readily comply with the motion yesterday and save all this time and all this debate? Why did not the minister rise at once and say the motion was satisfactory?


Mr. Speaker:: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member but his time has expired, with some modest allowance for interruptions.


Raymond Joseph Michael O'Hurley: He had not said anything.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, as I said a little earlier, since I took over this portfolio in October, 1960 I have had very frequent meetings with my economists; we often meet
207$

daily. I receive reports from them verbally and in the form of working papers, outlining for me the economic situation in various parts of the country and in the country as a whole. With that information I am able to advise the government and the government is able to formulate policy.
As I said earlier, since I took over the department there has been published no such document as that for which the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate is asking. As I say, the information from my economists is given verbally and in the form of departmental working papers which assist me in my work as minister. So I have to say once again, Mr. Speaker, that there is no such paper; there has been no formal paper such as that for which the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has asked. I must simply say that there is no such paper produced, and of course it therefore cannot be produced for the hon. member.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words on this matter. I had not intended to do so, but the reply just given by the Minister of Trade and Commerce is such an unusual one that it cannot be allowed to go without comment. I am sure that when the Minister of Trade and Commerce reads what he has just said he will agree that he indeed made a most amazing statement. It must not be forgotten that when this resolution was before the house yesterday it was resisted by the minister-


George Harris Hees: No, it was not resisted; I just said "Stand".


Paul Joseph James Martin: The minister says he did not resist it. The record will show that he did.


An hon. Member:: He did not resist it.


Murdo William Martin: He resisted it not only yesterday, but on an earlier occasion, clearly indicating that the government did not intend to be called upon to do what the Prime Minister himself had done in January, 1958.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege, 1 have been accused of doing something which I did not do. As far as I am aware, yesterday was the first time this motion has come up this year. At that time I simply said "Stand". That is not resisting the motion-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Of course it is resisting it.


George Harris Hees: -and a year ago when this motion came up I gave the same explanation as I gave today. I advised the house that there was no such document-
Economic Forecast for Current Year


Murdo William Martin: That is not a question of privilege.


George Harris Hees: -and that therefore it could not be produced.


Murdo William Martin: Mr. Speaker, 1 have a limited time. If my hon. friend raises a proper question of privilege, that is all right. When a minister says "Stand", that certainly indicates that he has some reservation about the motion. The minister could have risen and said, "There is no such document", and that would have ended it.
Mr. Pallet!: He has said it now; does it end it?


Murdo William Martin: He has said it now, but what I am now doing is examining the validity of that statement in the light of what was said by the minister of trade and commerce who preceded the present minister. No explanation has been given. The minister could have said, "I note what the minister of trade and commerce who was in office in 1960 said with regard to the character of annual reports, but I have not decided to carry on the same practice". That is not what the minister said. He used significant words in his statement; he said, "I see my economists regularly. We have working papers. There is no formal document". However, the words of the minister were such as to leave open the interpretation that the practice laid down by his predecessor is still being followed.
The Minister of Trade and Commerce could have repudiated this; or with regard to the practice as outlined by the former minister on August 10, 1960 and quoted by the hon, member for Bonavista-Twillingate, he could have said that practice was no longer being observed. I cannot find, in what the minister said, any justification for this house concluding that in the Department of Trade and Commerce there is not presented to the minister in some form-formal, informal, or whatever the minister wants to call it-a report which bears the quality of the kind of report which the Prime Minister, so improperly in our judgment, revealed to this house on January 20, 1958, but having himself established that practice, now estops the minister and this government from denying this house the right of access to whatever documents are now in the possession of the Minister of Trade and Commerce.
In seeking to understand the words uttered by the minister a few moments ago I think we have a right to note what was said by the former deputy minister of trade and commerce who spoke in this city the other day-


Gordon Minto Churchill: No, you have not.


Murdo William Martin: -who was the one
who signed-

Economic Forecast for Current Year


John Whitney Pickersgill: Now we will have some more closure.


Murdo William Martin: -the privileged document, the secret, confidential document which the Prime Minister so brazenly displayed for the house to see and the country to note, contrary to our practice, contrary to the traditions of parliamentary practice in countries like ours.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Does my hon. friend think it
was a mistake?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Of course it was a mistake, and my hon. friend from Bona-vista-Twillingate also said it was a mistake. The contention of the hon. member for Bona-vista-Twillingate is that, having established this practice, the Prime Minister owes to the house, as does his government, the right to receive a document which the Prime Minister argued on January 20, 1958 he had a right to reveal to the house.


John Whitney Pickersgill: And which he said should have been revealed months before.


Paul Joseph James Martin: And which should have been revealed without a motion of this kind being put forward. The man who signed the economic report of 1957, produced on January 20, 1958, Mr. Mitchell Sharp, said-


Gordon Minto Churchill: Order.


Paul Joseph James Martin: He said:
Look at what happened to the economic outlook reports-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. There appears to be some question as to the relevancy of the line of argument the hon. member is following. The motion is to produce a current document. The hon. member is seeking to introduce what Mr. Mitchell Sharp said about a document in 1958.


Paul Joseph James Martin: What I am seeking-


Mr. Speaker:: I fail to see the relevance of that at this moment. Perhaps before the hon. member proceeds he could tell me what is the relevance.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I can appreciate Your Honour's difficulty and I want to help Your Honour, because you do approach these things with an impartiality which all of us in this house greatly respect.


Mr. Smallwood:: The hon. member for Hull certainly did not.


Paul Joseph James Martin: What I am seeking to do is analyse the words of the Minister of Trade and Commerce. I am saying that, having in mind what his predecessor said, what has been the practice throughout, and in the light of the words used by the

present Minister of Trade and Commerce, it cannot now be concluded that he is not in receipt of reports which in principle constitute what the Prime Minister gave to this house, improperly, on January 20, 1958.


George Harris Hees: Don't be ridiculous.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I say to the Minister of Trade and Commerce-


George Harris Hees: And I say to you, "Stop being ridiculous; stop being pompous".


Paul Joseph James Martin: -do not preclude us from obtaining information which you have in your possession-


George Harris Hees: I have not.


Paul Joseph James Martin: -and which the Prime Minister said should be given to the house and it should not require a motion to obtain it. It is because I am seeking to establish that the words used by the Minister of Trade and Commerce really mean, in effect, that there are documents, that I am referring to these words of a former deputy minister of trade and commerce.


Mr. Speaker:: With due respect to the hon. member's argument, I cannot see the relevance of recalling the words of a civil servant who is not now in the department and does not know what the practice is at the present time.


George Harris Hees: On a question of privilege, the hon. member has persistently said that there is a document similar to a document which I say does not exist. I have told him over and over again that I receive information almost daily from my economists, verbally and by way of working papers. There is nothing in the form of a formal report such as the hon. member is asking for. It does not exist. I receive information at various times and in various forms, but I receive nothing in the form of a document of the kind the hon. member is asking for. He says I have it. I have told him I do not have it, and he must take my word for it.


Mr. Speaker:: I have been a little troubled over that aspect of the argument. It is customary in the house to accept the word-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Can I say a word on the question of privilege?


Mr. Speaker:: If he feels he has to, the hon. member may do so later on.
It has been the practice of most hon. members to accept the word of another member given in his place-


Paul Joseph James Martin: I accept it readily.


Mr. Speaker:: -on a matter which is peculiarly within his own knowledge. There is

disagreement-and it is an arguable point- as to what is the meaning of what the minister has said. This motion asserts that there is a document and calls for its production, so we are debating

and it is a legitimate debate-the existence of the document. It is legitimate to marshal all the evidence there may be to indicate that what the minister has said does not really deny the existence of a document, although hon. members must accept his specific words, in so far as they are specific. Thus, I cannot give effect to the objection that is taken.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wish to raise a point of order. I listened carefully to what the minister said. He said there was no formal document, and I accept his word at once. There is no formal document. But I did not refer to a formal document. I have asked for a copy of the latest economic forecast. The hon. gentleman has told us he does get economic forecasts every day, and I am asking for the latest information so that we may know what it is about.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Since the minister has risen on a question of privilege and since Your Honour has made an observation in regard to it, may I say I readily agree that if a minister makes a particular representation it must be accepted. But I am basing my argument, first of all, on what the minister said when he first spoke this afternoon and now, more particularly, on what he has just said. In this regard I should like to read again the motion put forward by my hon. friend from Bonavista-Twillingate. It asks:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of the latest economic forecast-
And the minister has acknowledged he receives such forecasts.
-prepared in the Department of Trade and Commerce in the series substituted for the Canadian Economic Outlook as described in Hansard for August 10, 1960 at page 7878.
The minister has not denied that he receives reports which would come within the characterisation of the words used by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate in this resolution, nor has the minister said, and he was given the opportunity, that the practice followed by his predecessor, the present Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Churchill) is one which he himself has changed. He has not; and we would assume that the practice of the former minister continues to be the practice of the present minister. What did the former minister have to say?


Mr. Macdonnell:: Would the hon. member permit a question? I have tried to listen 26207-1-133
Economic Forecast for Current Year carefully to what the hon. member has said and to what the Minister of Trade and Commerce has said-


Paul Joseph James Martin: Ask me the question, because I have only got a few minutes.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: How could the hon. member read this resolution and then go on to say that the present minister did not indicate that he was following a different plan? That seems to me to be refusing to face the words which the Minister of Trade and Commerce used.


George Harris Hees: The hon. member has stated I have not denied it-


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister has spoken already.


George Harris Hees: I follow my own system of working with my department and my economists-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: I think the hon. member who has the floor has not yielded, and he has limited time.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Let us recall, because the Minister of Trade and Commerce did not, what his predecessor said on August 10, 1960 in the statement referred to in the notice of motion which is before us now:


Gordon Minto Churchill: I want to make it very clear that there has been no change in the giving of information by the economics branch to me and the transmitting of that information to the government where necessary. I have asked that monthly reports be sent to me from the economics branch and that periodic forecasts be given to me indicating what, in the opinion of our economists, lies ahead in the few months, or the remaining months, of the year. This has been done.
Is that still being done? Does the Minister of Trade and Commerce say now that that is not being done?
Then his predecessor went on to say:
X found that the report which has evoked so much interest was being issued in March as a forecast for the balance of the year, and as the economic climate changes so rapidly it appeared to me that it would be wiser to have a series of reports-
This is what the minister said he is receiving.
-that would keep a person up to date on economic matters.
It was on the basis of one of those reports that I gave the economic outlook for the balance of 1960 when I spoke on the subject last week. Now, that is what is going on; there has been no restriction whatever in the amount of advice given by or sought from the economics branch of the department. I am convinced that the method that has now been introduced is better and keeps me better informed from month to month as to the trend of economic activity in Canada.
I cannot believe the minister would take the position that he is not following this

Economic Forecast for Current Year practice now, because to do so would be holding himself up to ridicule. The Minister of Trade and Commerce-the one who is supposed to feel the pulse of the economy of the nation-


George Harris Hees: Stop being pompous.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. gentleman ought not to be infantile in this house. He is now in a difficult position. He feels himself embarrassed at the moment-


George Harris Hees: I am not embarrassed.


Paul Joseph James Martin: He does not want to take issue with the Prime Minister or with the former minister of trade and commerce. What we are asking is that these reports be given to this house on the basis of the precedent established by the Prime Minister. We said they should not be given, but that is not what this government says; it is not what the Prime Minister said on January 20, 1958. He said, then, in substance: I do not care how confidential this is; I do not care how privileged it is; it is information that parliament should have. That is the practice he established.
We are asking through this motion that the government should give us the same information as the Prime Minister assumed he had the right to give and in the way in which he used it in January of 1958. As my hon. friend from Bonavista-Twillingate has said, the situation today is parallel with the events which attended January 20, 1958. We are on the eve of an election. We shall be arguing in the country that unemployment under this administration has reached dangerous and alarming levels. The government will be answering that argument. The government will be trying to justify its policy. It will indicate that there is a gradual improvement in the economic state of the nation. This will be contested. Some economists are already contesting it.


An hon. Member:: Are you happy?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member asks: "Am I happy?" He knows perfectly well that that is an impulsive question from a young member of parliament. We should like to do something about it. We want first of all to know what are the facts. Let us have these forecasts which the minister receives every day, or every month. Let us have this series of reports.


Leon David Crestohl: Why do they suppress it?


Murdo William Martin: Why should hon. gentlemen find it proper to deny this information to us when the Prime Minister in this house felt that this was information that

should be given to parliament? What justification can there be? Is there something in these reports that the minister is concealing that is contrary to the public assessment of the economic situation?


John Whitney Pickersgill: And contrary to what the government says?


Murdo William Martin: Yes, and contrary to what the government says?


An hon. Member:: No coaching.


Murdo William Martin: Is the situation going to be more serious in the months ahead?


John Cameron Pallett: This is not 1956.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It certainly is not; we had full employment then.


Murdo William Martin: Mr. Speaker, the very argument which the Prime Minister used on January 20, 1958 under circumstances-


An hon. Member:: You will not forget that.


Murdo William Martin: No one will ever forget it because on that occasion the Prime Minister did something that has never before been done in the annals of parliamentary history. But if it was right for him, it is right for us to ask for these reports. It is the duty of the government to produce these series of documents or series of reports-


Gordon Minto Churchill: What documents? What reports?


Murdo William Martin: -which indicate the assessment of the economic situation made by the officials of the department.


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


George Harris Hees: Thank heaven.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me we are entitled as members of the house to draw attention to the tactics being followed by the members of the opposition and the cynical approach-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order.


Gordon Minto Churchill: You cannot take it.


An hon. Member:: Miss Puddleduck.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I scarcely see how a point of order could have arisen so soon but if the hon. member has one I shall hear it.


John Whitney Pickersgill: My point of order is this. I think perhaps Your Honour will find I am rather more perceptive than the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre was because the Minister of Justice got up and started to talk about the tactics used by hon. members. I was severely restricted by Your

Honour in the kind of argument I could use and it was even suggested that I could not identify the documents.


Gordon Minto Churchill: You didn't.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Surely it is not germane to a discussion of this motion for an hon. member, above all the Minister of Justice, to get up and in his first phrase start imputing motives to other hon. members who are exercising their rights in the house.


Mr. Montgomery:: Exactly what are you
doing now?


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is my point of order and it seems to me the hon. gentleman should be restricted.


Mr. Speaker:: I cannot see anything derogatory in an hon. member saying of another hon. gentleman that in carrying on the debate he has tactics. It seems to me that imputes nothing immoral.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, I am convinced that my hon. friends would have been very angry with me indeed if I were to have said that they were completely without tactics, as devoid of tactics as they are of common sense, in bringing on this motion. That would really have annoyed them. I have not imputed motives. I will leave the analysis and conclusion as to motives to others when the facts are fully exposed and placed before them. Because I fully recognize and appreciate the rules of the house with regard to the imputation of motives I do not intend to impute motives.
I believe we are entitled to look at the situation which by their very words the members of the opposition have asked us to create in this house in bringing forward this motion.
For the moment may I leave aside altogether the question of whether there exists such a document as is asked for. It seems to me the statement of the Minister of Trade and Commerce has disposed of the motion itself and certainly should have disposed of the argument long ago when he said there is no such document that can be produced. Hon. members opposite insist that there is one. Somewhere, they feel sure, there should be such a document, that there must be one.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There certainly should be.


Edmund Davie Fulton: If there is, what is it? What would it be? It would be the latest written economic report made to the Minister of Trade and Commerce.
Hon. members of the house including Your Honour heard what was said by the hon. member for Essex East just a moment ago. As I understood him he included the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate in his 26207-1-133}
Economic Forecast for Current Year reference and indicated that that hon. member shared the same view; that is, as he said, that it was a mistake, and that it was an undesirable thing that such a document should be tabled. That is their view.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is the view we have always taken.


Edmund Davie Fulton: It is their view that the document in question should not have been tabled back in 1959 when it was tabled in this house.


John Whitney Pickersgill: In 1958.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Hon. gentlemen opposite said it was a mistake and went on to use adjectives-I do not recall them all-indicating that they took a very poor view of that development. The hon. member went on to say that this represented a bad practice. Of course, we do not share their view with regard to the tabling of the document at that time under the circumstances in which it was tabled. It will be recalled that it was no longer current. I think the document at that time was approximately a year and three months or a year and six months old-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Nine months.


Edmund Davie Fulton: It was stated that it was our view that the document was no longer current and that the confidential nature of it which argued against its tabling when the report was first made no longer applied. But my hon. friends opposite do not accept that view. They say that that was a bad thing to have done.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What are they now asking this house to do?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Really, Mr. Speaker-


John Whitney Pickersgill: A question of privilege, Your Honour.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I am sure Your Honour will assist me by not allowing the hon. member to interrupt.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, the minister is seeking to put words in my mouth.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member raises a question of privilege. Of course, if there is one, it is his duty to raise it when it arises.


John Whitney Pickersgill: My question of privilege is this, Mr. Speaker. In this very restricted debate the minister is putting into my mouth words which I did not use at all. I based my whole argument on the Prime Minister's statement that the previous government had

Economic Forecast for Current Year concealed this document and that it should have been published by the previous government at the time. Let the minister answer that.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member is rising really to explain a misinterpretation, which he may do at the conclusion of the remarks of the minister. It is not a question of privilege that arises in the course of debate.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, if I am guilty of an error in saying that the hon. member shared those views I think the place he should ask the correction to be made is of the hon. member for Essex East, because he was the one who indicated that he and his friend the hon. member for Bonavista-Twil-lingate both took this view.
The point, however, is this. At least one of those hon. gentlemen, a leading member of the opposition party, has stated in the course of his remarks that in their view this was a wrong thing to do, that it was a wrong practice.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is not the
position you took.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What are they now asking to do except that, by this motion, one mistake should become the practice? Could anything be more cynical than that?


John Whitney Pickersgill: What the Prime Minister did was much more cynical.


Edmund Davie Fulton: In the view of hon. members opposite this was a bad thing. It should not have been done when it was done. Now they want to make it a practice in this house. They want to perpetuate a mistake. When I say "they" I refer to hon. gentlemen opposite. That is what they are asking this house to do. Well, sir, this house and the country learned the danger of perpetuating mistakes back in 1957 and they put the Liberals over there on the other side of the house so that mistakes would not be perpetuated any longer.


John Whitney Pickersgill: You are concealing a document the Prime Minister accused us of concealing. That is what you were doing.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Let me make it clear again, that I am discussing their view when I say it is submitted it was a mistake.


John Whitney Pickersgill: How about discussing the Prime Minister's view?


Edmund Davie Fulton: We, of course, as I said earlier, did not say it was a mistake under the circumstances under which it was done.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Let us have the reports, then.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The difference between that circumstance and this is that when the other document was tabled it was tabled many months after it was published.


John Whitney Pickersgill: And we were accused of hiding it.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The report was tabled many months after it was first made.


Frank Charles McGee: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. We have just witnessed again these two arrogant gentlemen sprawling in their seats interrupting freely and at will the hon. member who has the floor. Surely that is contrary to the rules of the house.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: That is right.


Mr. Speaker:: The Minister of Justice has the floor. The minister is entitled to make his argument. I find it difficult to follow because of interruptions.


Leon David Crestohl: These juvenile backbenchers.


Mr. Speaker:: There have been interjections from both sides of the house. I invite hon. members to give the minister who has but a few minutes, a clear opportunity to present his argument.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is very little argument.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I am nearly through, Mr. Speaker. I have only the following two points to make. The hypothetical or alleged document the production of which is now sought would, if it existed, be current. That results inevitably from the terms of the hon. member's resolution.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is being hidden.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The hon. member in his resolution asked for the production of the most recent in an alleged series of documents. The hon. gentleman seeks the production of a current document which he well knows-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Which the Prime Minister said we hid.


Edmund Davie Fulton: -it is not the practice to produce, for reasons which he also well knows; whereas the production of the other document on the previous occasion was the production of a document which was no longer current. Therefore the two circumstances are entirely different.
But third, Mr. Speaker, my colleague has said that there is no such document. Therefore my argument may be summarized as follows.
First, there is no such document. Second, there is no precedent for its production, even if such a document existed. Third, since it is perfectly obvious that all we

are being asked to do by my hon. friends opposite is to establish as a practice that which they themselves have said they regard as a mistake, I am confident that this house will treat the motion with the contempt it deserves.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the house ready for the question?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I believe I would have a moment or two in which to reply.


Gordon Minto Churchill: No.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Is this not a substantive motion?


Mr. Speaker:: I believe that the motion is a substantive one.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Speaking on the point of order, Mr. Speaker, may I say this. Surely the mover has a right of reply.


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member speaks now he will close the debate.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wish to speak now to close the debate. I agree completely with one thing the Minister of Justice said. I agree completely that it would be quite wrong to have this motion passed. It would be contrary to good parliamentary practice. It would be contrary to the proper relationship between public servants and public men which existed up until January 20, 1958 and which was destroyed by the improper publication of the document referred to in my motion by the Prime Minister on that occasion. The only reason I had for making this motion was to put on record something to remind the people of Canada that the Prime Minister himself had said that the previous government should have published that document when it was current.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Oh, no. I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member has misstated what was said. What the Prime Minister said was that the former government should not have attempted to deceive the people as to what was in the document.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is not a question of privilege. It is just wasting time. The Prime Minister said the document was hidden.
He said, "They concealed the facts". He said, "They did not tell us what the facts were".
The Prime Minister also said-and this was in reply to Mr. Knowles-"It is assumed it has been tabled". He did not know whether or not it had been tabled when he started to use it. All he knew was that he had torn the top page off it with the word "confidential" in order to try to cover up.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I rise on a point of order, it.
Economic Forecast for Current Year


John Whitney Pickersgill: It was the most shocking performance that ever took place in the Canadian parliament.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The hon. member has stated that the Prime Minister tore the top page off the document. He has no evidence whatever to that effect. He should withdraw that statement immediately.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I withdraw it immediately.
I have no evidence. Maybe somebody else tore it off for him. However, when the Prime Minister tabled it, it was torn off. Those of us who saw the document in its original form, know that and they include the former minister of trade and commerce, Mr. Churchill, who saw it many months previously, as he knows very well, as did the Prime Minister. He said he found it at the last possible moment. The Minister of Veterans Affairs knows that is not true. He knows that months previously the Prime Minister had this document which he said was hidden. It was not hidden at all. It was available to every minister in the files of his department.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. May I remind the hon. member that the debate is on the production of a current document. He is getting rather widely afield. In his argument on what was done with a similar previous document he is correct but it is not proper to go into other circumstances.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Your Honour is quite right. This incident is one of the few things in public life which, because of its disgraceful character, arouses me very much. However, I submit at once to Your Honour's ruling. I do not in any way wish to participate in, to appear to condone or to have anything to do with that disgraceful kind of conduct, I would ask the permission of the house to withdraw my motion.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Gordon Minto Churchill: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Has the hon. member leave to withdraw his motion?


Gordon Minto Churchill: No.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Those in favour of the motion will please say yea.


George Harris Hees: How ridiculous can you get? How cynical can you be?


Leon David Crestohl: What are you afraid of?


Mr. Speaker:: Those opposed to the motion will please say nay.


Some hon. Members:: Nay.


Mr. Speaker:: In my opinion the nays have

Supply-Northern Affairs


An hon. Member:: It is unanimous.
Motion negatived.


Mr. Speaker:: I declare the motion lost. It being six o'clock, the house will revert to the business which was interrupted at five o'clock.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Martineau in the chair.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 8 p.m.
DEPARTMENT OF NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL RESOURCES Water resources branch-
649. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $40,000.
Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I should like to say something with regard to this vote. Perhaps these remarks do not have the urgency which they had recently. The minister no doubt is aware that, with his responsibility over water resources, he has received a brief which was prepared jointly for the governments of Canada and the United States with respect to the proposed extension of Niagara river remedial works and certain proposed operational procedures. One such brief was prepared by the Ontario hydro and one was prepared by the power authority of the state of New York and they were submitted in March of last year.
This fact did not become known to the people of Niagara Falls until an item appeared in the Globe and Mail of October 6, 1961, wherein it was indicated that the proposal was to undertake certain studies with a view to making a further diversion of water from the Niagara river for power production. When these plans became known to individuals in Niagara Falls, there was a considerable outcry. Under the guidance of the greater Niagara chamber of commerce, which covers three of the largest municipalities in my riding, a committee was set up comprised of both United States and Canadian residents from the twin cities of Niagara Falls. After hearing representations from Ontario hydro and from the United States power authority, the committee found itself completely opposed to the proposal.
While it is admitted that the initial request was only to conduct certain tests, these tests would have resulted, it was anticipated, in a reduction of the water flowing over the

falls. Now, in 1950 there was a treaty entered into between the United States and Canadian governments, and that treaty provided there would be a minimum flow over Niagara Falls of 100,000 cubic feet per second during the day between the hours of 8 a.m. and 10 p.m., and that would be from April 1 to September 15. Then, between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. the same quantity of water would be allowed from September 16 to October 31 inclusive. At all other times, the allowable flow was to be reduced to a minimum of 50,000 cubic feet per second, except when there are ice jams in the river to such an extent that it would be necessary to flush them down. The 100,000 cubic feet per second allowance, which is allowed in what is called the tourist season, is about one third the flow of the Niagara river.
When on November 1, 1961, for the first time, the smaller amount was permitted it was immediately ascertained that in so far as the laymen or tourists were concerned, there was an extremely bad effect. It was apparent that there was in the upper river large rocks which had never before been visible; that the water in the basin below the falls in which the Maid of the Mist plies had dropped by about 35 feet exposing hazardous rocks; that the mist which had formerly hung over the falls and was in itself a tourist attraction, had fallen to ground level because there was not sufficient updraft resulting from the fall of water to lift it. The local people were appalled by this, particularly since they have made very strenuous efforts in the last few years to attempt to increase their tourist business all year round and not simply limit it to the pleasant summer months of the year.
Meetings were arranged and there was considerable outcry. I had expected that when these estimates were raised I would be in a position to make considerable complaint and appeal to the government to heed the outcry of the residents of Niagara Falls, New York and Niagara Falls, Ontario to assist. As a result of correspondence with the then minister of energy in Ontario, I received the brief which had been forwarded to the international joint commission and which had indicated that it was anticipated some $3 million worth more in power might be developed by what was considered to be an additional minor diversion. However, that diversion, it was expected by those in the area who were interested, would have resulted in an even further loss of water, in less sound developing from the falls, in less mist and indeed in a decrease in beauty. It has been estimated that the falls bring into Niagara Falls city about $40 million a

year in tourist business, and it was strongly urged that $3 million worth of power produced would be insufficient to compensate for this loss.
Because of the complaints made, it was agreed by the joint commission that they would go to Niagara Falls, take certain photographs and view the falls in its reduced state. A meeting was to be arranged in January. However, within the past few weeks the United States power authority, that is the state power authority of New York, had withdrawn its application to the international joint commission to conduct such experiments which would necessarily reduce the flow. Shortly thereafter, Ontario Hydro-Electric Power Commission as well withdrew its application. I have, under date of March 20, a communication from the greater Niagara chamber of commerce which indicates it has placed a resolution before the Ontario chambers of commerce which are to meet in Niagara Falls on May 9, 10 and 11, and to which I invite all members of the house who may wish to attend, to ask both levels of government to intervene in any further approach towards the commission to perform such experiments with a view to cutting the water falling over the falls.
Notwithstanding the fact the applications have been withdrawn it is the feeling of the greater Niagara chamber of commerce that, so far as is possible, an undertaking should be obtained from the provincial power authority and from this department not to permit further diversion of the water from the face of the falls. This has been supported by a resolution from the city of Niagara Falls and a resolution of the Niagara Falls local of the united electrical workers of Canada. I ask, Mr. Chairman, whether the minister has had any such communication from the interested parties and whether he has any remarks which he would like to make concerning the department's position in respect of a possible renewal of the applications which I am informed may come within three or four months or three or four years.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, this matter, as the hon. member has intimated, is one which has been handled largely by the international joint commission on boundary waterways. The position of the water resources branch of my department in respect of this matter has been to provide the necessary engineering data and so forth. 1 can assure the hon. member that the department is very conscious of all the implications of a proposal of this kind.
It so happens that the tourist promotional activities of the government come under the Department of Northern Affairs and National
Supply-Northern Affairs Resources. Therefore not only are we interested in this proposal from the standpoint of its impact on water resources but also from the standpoint of its impact on the appeal of Niagara Falls to the tourists, and the contribution of Niagara Falls to the tourist industry.
I am sure the hon. member is also aware that inherent in the treaty are the tourist potentialities of Niagara Falls. I thank her for her contribution to the discussion in this way and assure her the matter is being watched very carefully.


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: May I ask the minister one or two further questions. Those interested in the problem in Niagara Falls have had some difficulty in ascertaining the meaning of certain words within the treaty. There is a particular reference to off-season, and this is now taken to mean from the first of November in each year; but it is not so defined. There is also a reference to the beauty of Niagara, but of course no criterion is given. It became very apparent within the last four months that there was a considerable difference of opinion as to what the beauty of Niagara might be, whether it might be a six foot or a six inch flow over the crest. I wonder if the minister might inform the committee whether there is any definition to which such interested persons might have recourse, and which might be of some assistance to them if the problem arises again.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I would suspect that the description of the beauty of Niagara Falls is a qualitative rather t\ian a quantitative category. Of course it would involve insurance that a sufficient fall of water is maintained, and I do not think we could get an actual specific judgment from an engineer or from engineering sources. The personnel in the water resources branch are primarily qualified engineers. If we wanted an accurate description of what is described in the phrase "beauties of Niagara" I suggest we should have to resort to the opinion of honeymoon couples.


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: They are the last ones who would know.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would like to ask the minister about something which is either under way or is still under contemplation; I am not quite sure which. I want to ask about something in Manitoba and perhaps I can best explain it by reading a brief extract from the Winnipeg Free Press of January 26, 1962, headed "Roblin blasts Fairfield".


Paul Joseph James Martin: Fairclough?

Supply-Northern Affairs


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, Dr. George Fairfield, Conservative member of parliament. It reads:
Premier Duff Roblin Friday accused Dr. George Fairfield, Conservative member of parliament for Portage-Neepawa with making "unwarranted and misleading" statements about the proposed Assini-boine river diversion.
Dr. Fairfield Thursday told the House of Commons that the diversion could end up as a $12 million "flop." (See earlier story page 8).
I am not going to put that on the record.
In a sharp reply Friday, Premier Roblin said, "It is a matter of regret that Dr. Fairfield should make what I take to be an unwarranted and misleading statement.
"I must assume that he is not well informed about water control and conservation on the Assiniboine river.
"Ten years of study and the best counsel available in North America have gone into the water conservation plan now adopted by the Canadian and Manitoba governments.
"All this information is available to Dr. Fairfield any time he wishes to make use of it. As a professional man, I'm sure he will understand that our professional advisors have taken into full account the various problems involved in these projects."
Dr. Fairfield's attack on the project came only a day after agriculture minister-
That is the provincial minister-
-George Hutton had won approval for the floodway from a majority of members of the prairie flood control organization, which represents people of the area.
I think the house would be interested to know whether the minister is on the side of the premier or on the side of his colleague here in the house, and also what progress is being made in this controversial question.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Actually this item, as the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate knows, comes under the purview of prairie farm rehabilitation, but I am quite happy to answer his question. Judging by the statement he has read from the Winnipeg Free Press there seems to be an honest difference of opinion between the two gentlemen to whom he has referred, and I think I could give the same answer to this query as I gave to the previous query concerning Niagara Falls, that this, I think, is as much a qualitative as it is a quantitative judgment. In so far as wanting to know which side I am on, I would say I am on the side of the angels.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could the minister tell us which side the angels are on, because I think a lot of people would like to know? Perhaps the minister could also give us a very brief progress report on the Red river floodway which I believe comes within the purview of his department. I do not want to hold the estimates up, but it would be interesting to know what progress is being made with this project, which was going to be started four or five years ago. We all recall

that when Premier Roblin took office in Winnipeg it was going to be done in no time; but now a long, long period has elapsed and there does not appear to be great progress made.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: So far as the Red river project is concerned this does come under the Canada Water Conservation Act.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, I wanted to be in order.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I can appreciate that, Mr. Chairman.


Gordon Minto Churchill: That is new.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I have reported from time to time when the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has inquired solicitously about this matter. We are making very encouraging progress and the program is going to be under way this year. As a matter of fact, judging from the past performance of the former administration, it is about 20 years ahead of what might have been expected.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think I should thank the minister for the suggestion that the former administration was so aggressive that it would have gone on with the project before the need was manifest, since the great Winnipeg flood is not yet 20 years away. As the minister knows, at the time when Mr. Roblin was successful in becoming premier of Manitoba he assured the people that Dief and Duff were just "like this". I do not know how Hansard is going to interpret that, but it meant they were very close. They do not seem to be very close nowadays; but he said there would be no time lost before this project would be under way. Does the minister really think that before parliament is dissolved there will actually be a shovelful of earth taken out?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Oh yes, Mr. Chairman. As a matter of fact there was some digging done last summer. Since the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate abandoned Manitoba for Newfoundland he has been out of touch with the situation in Manitoba. I know he was there during the 1930's when things were at a bad pass under the former Liberal government.


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, under the Bennett government. The minister is too young to remember, but I do.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Since Mr. Roblin and the Conservative administration took over there is a whole new situation. The atmosphere is one of progress and I am sure the hon. member would be delighted to see it if he would return home to Manitoba and pay a visit to us there.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could the minister say whether any contracts have been let under the joint program and what proportion of the cost is being paid out of the federal treasury?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: This has all been put on the record previously. From memory I can say that there are various aspects of this project. It is a very comprehensive program of water conservation and control. One of the basic contributions was a federal contribution of 37.5 per cent under the Canada Water Conservation Act. I want to be accurate in this respect. The ancillary works will be met by contributions as high as 75 per cent of the cost, that is, relocation of roads and so forth which are involved in this Red river floodway. It also incorporates the complete water basin project; that is, the Assiniboine plus the Red river. The Assiniboine aspect, as I have already indicated, is coming under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, which represents a federal contribution of some 50 per cent.


John Whitney Pickersgill: In connection with the part with which the minister's department is concerned, have there been any contracts let under the joint program yet?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: The contracts have been called, I believe. I must not be presumptuous, Mr. Chairman, on this matter because the contracts are handled by the provincial government, and I am afraid I could not answer that question without referring to the government of Manitoba.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Northern administration branch-
Welfare and industrial divisions-
650. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $270,000.
Erik Nielsen: Mr. Chairman, I cannot let this item pass without remarking, in contrast to the remarks that have been made by hon. members opposite today in connection with northern development generally, upon the housing improvements that have taken place in the Yukon and Northwest Territories generally in the last two years. Particularly concerned in this item is an amount which will set up a low cost housing loans scheme for the Yukon territory, I believe. This plan was evolved in the last year and a half and will make available to residents of the Yukon a fund upon which they can draw to construct housing, where this was impossible before. In keeping with the enlarged regulations under the National Housing Act which has brought about a construction program in the Yukon, where there was absolutely none 26207-1-134
Supply-Northern Affairs prior to 1957, this provision in the minister's supplementaries is very encouraging indeed.
I simply rise to remark upon that aspect and to ask the minister whether it is the intention of the department to continue the appropriation that was granted last year in connection with the development of an urban renewal scheme in the city of Whitehorse; that is, the development of what is commonly known as lot 19. I have consulted representatives of the property owner and the officials of the city of Whitehorse, who I understand just today or the day before communicated with the minister's department requesting that the lot 19 scheme be undertaken once again by the joint federal, territorial and municipal governments. Therefore I rise now to ask the minister whether the federal participation in this scheme will be renewed if the owner of lot 19, the municipal authorities and the territorial government agree once again to co-operate in an effort to rehabilitate the areas in the city of Whitehorse which should properly be considered under an urban renewal program such as that suggested.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. member for Yukon for his complimentary references to this program. He, of course, could himself have taken considerable credit for the scheme if he were not such a modest gentleman, because originally the suggestion for a program of this kind came from the hon. member.
I am pleased to hear that it is having such a beneficial effect in providing very badly needed housing accommodation for the people north of the 60th parallel. This program, of course, is carried forward into the Northwest Territories as well as the Yukon territory.
With reference to the specific problem of urban renewal in the city of Whitehorse, again the hon. member for Yukon will be aware that our plans in this regard were somewhat slowed down by the failure last fall of the plebiscite to get the approval of the people of Whitehorse. However, I can assure him that we have not changed our plans in this regard. We want to proceed with this urban renewal program. We feel that it is in the best interests of the people concerned, and the hon. member can be assured that any effort in this regard will take into consideration the local problems with respect to the dislocation of the people who would be involved in this urban renewal program. (Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I only wish to say a few words about this item dealing with northern areas.
I should like to point out to the minister that education in new Quebec should normally come under provincial jurisdiction-

Supply-Northern Affairs


Paul Raymond Martineau: In my opinion, the hon. member is straying from the item under discussion when he deals with this matter.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I shall have the opportunity to come back to it later on.
(Text):


Paul Raymond Martineau: Shall vote 650 carry?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Before the vote passes, could the minister tell us what items are comprised in here. Is this wholly for housing?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: The item you are referring to is-


John Whitney Pickersgill: No. 650.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Yes, this is to provide for the low cost housing program, in this instance for the Yukon territory.


John Whitney Pickersgill: This vote is entirely for the Yukon? I think the minister said that part of it was in Mackenzie River, but that may be the main vote.


Erik Nielsen: It is for the Northwest Territories as a whole.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Yes, the Northwest Territories as a whole, plus the Yukon.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could the minister say in what places this is being carried out.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: This development program applies to the whole northern area of Canada, where formerly the native population was nomadic and in the literal sense they were hopping from igloo to igloo-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Without roads.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: -to quote a classical phrase. The igloo was quite a useful form of temporary accommodation; but once industrial activity and development makes possible the establishment of permanent settlements, the igloo is no longer a suitable kind of housing accommodation. This situation has created a very urgent demand for minimum standard housing for the people of the north and this program is going forward in every community that requires this type of housing.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could the minister say whether any of this housing is provided for Indians, or does his colleague, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, have a separate program?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, in view of his former responsibilities in these matters, would be aware that Indian affairs


are handled by the Department of Citizenship and Immigration in the north as well as other parts of Canada.


Paul Raymond Martineau: The hon. member for
Yukon.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is only true to a limited extent, because the minister will recall-[DOT]


Paul Raymond Martineau: Order. I recognized the hon. member for Yukon.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I was replying to an observation made to me by the minister.


Erik Nielsen: I believe I was on my feet first.


John Whitney Pickersgill: If that is the wish of the Chair, I will resume my seat.


Paul Raymond Martineau: If the hon. member for Yukon wishes to yield the floor in order that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate may finish his observation, he may do so; but before the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate had risen I had already recognized the hon. member for Yukon and the floor is his unless he yields it.


Erik Nielsen: I wished to speak on the same subject, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to say that the program of low cost housing in the Yukon territory as provided for under this supplementary is equally as applicable to the Indian people of the Yukon as it is to other residents.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is in direct contradiction of what the minister said.


Erik Nielsen: It fills a gap that was very sadly overlooked during the 22 years of the previous administration. The program is already in operation in the Northwest Territories and is progressing quite well in the Yukon. It will provide low cost homes for people in all parts of the territory-indeed for all peoples in all parts of the territories- where such a program was previously completely unavailable.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am glad, Mr. Chairman, that you allowed the hon. member for the Yukon to correct what the minister has said. The minister said that the Indians were not covered by this program but came under the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. The hon. member for the Yukon promptly got up and corrected the minister's statement. He said these houses were available to Indians. I do not know which of the two hon. members is right, but they cannot both be right.


Erik Nielsen: On a question of privilege-


Paul Raymond Martineau: I think the hon. member is rising on a question of privilege.


Erik Nielsen: Yes. The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has accused me of contradicting the minister. I am doing no such thing. This program is in addition to that which was provided for the Indian people- a program which has been greatly expanded in the last few years to the benefit of the people of the north.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Perhaps I might comment.
I forgot it is some four years since the hon. member was responsible for these matters and so many changes have taken place since that time-so much progress has been made -that perhaps I should have been more specific in my reply.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That, of course, was why I was inquiring. It is nearly five years since I had the responsibility for the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.


An hon. Member:: Yes. And it will be another five-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh no. Perhaps five
months-


An hon. Member:: Four months.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I doubt if this is relevant to the item before us, interesting though it would be to debate this subject, and fruitless though it would be to debate it in the absence of the Prime Minister who is keeping hon. gentlemen opposite even more in the dark than the rest of the people of this country.


Paul Joseph James Martin: They are in a state of agitation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Visibly. However, I want to come back to the question of housing for the Indians. I assume the minister knows that when Mr. Lesage was minister of northern affairs, and I was the minister responsible for Indian affairs, an agreement was made between the two departments whereby the schools in the Northwest Territories were provided alike for the Indians and the rest of the population by the department of northern affairs. I think that was a wise thing to have done and a progressive step to have taken. I assumed that since there are no Indian reserves in the Northwest Territories-the Indians live anywhere they please, as does the rest of the population-the Department of Citizenship and Immigration did not have any housing program but that there was one single program in that area. I was surprised to hear the minister say that the Department of Citizenship and Immigration also had a program. Is that correct?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I think the hon. member has answered his own question. All these activities involving welfare, education, housing
26207-1-1341
Supply-Northern Affairs and so forth are handled on an interdepartmental basis in the interests of greater efficiency.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister is, of course, trying to cover up. What he is saying in other words, is that there is only one housing program and it is run by his department. Is that right or not?


Erik Nielsen: Mr. Chairman, if I may-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Ah, the parliamentary assistant to the rescue.


Erik Nielsen: The hon. member is trying in characteristic fashion to confuse the issue or else he is genuinely misinformed. As a former minister he should know that there was an Indian housing program across the whole of the north and it is continuing now in greatly expanded form as compared to what was done under the previous administration. This program which the minister has introduced by this supplementary estimate represents an addition to the existing program of the Indian affairs branch and is providing houses not only for the Indian people who may, if they wish, take the opportunity available to them, but to all the residents of the territory so that they might be provided with housing in circumstances where otherwise, because of the high cost of construction in the north and the nature of the present regulations under the National Housing Act, they would be unable to do so.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I must thank the hon. member for the Yukon for the first compliment he has ever paid me. He did this by pointing out that there was a very considerable Indian housing program when I was in the ministry. Inadvertently, the hon. gentleman has admitted the truth of what I was pointing out this afternoon, namely, that all these things were started by the previous government.


Erik Nielsen: Again, I cannot let that go by without comment, because I did not use the word "considerable" at all. If I had to comment on that program I would say that a program which was just piddling along under a Liberal administration has increased tenfold in the last four years.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Can the minister advise this committee if an estimate has been made by his department as to the cost per unit of this housing and how many units are involved in this item of $270,000?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: There is no specific cost per unit. The homes vary in cost from $500 to $7000. This is not a charity scheme on the part of the administration. This vote is included to provide mortgages to enable the
2088	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs local population to construct their own homes according to their ability to pay for them.
As to the specific number of homes that will be required, it is hard to make an accurate estimate because changes are taking place so rapidly in the north as people settle in the new communities; but it is estimated that over the next ten years some 11,700 units will be required. I believe that is accurate. I am speaking from memory and if I am incorrect I shall be happy to get in touch with the hon. member.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Does the minister realize that if the $250,000 which was mentioned this afternoon in connection with the Arizona Charlie dance hall was added to this amount it would make possible between 700 and 800 new homes in this region?


Erik Nielsen: Surely the hon. member is not following the precedent of his friends by criticizing the restoration of the Grand Palace theatre as part of the Dawson city celebrations? Does he think that the Dawson city festival is an unwise investment, or that it will not attract tourist traffic to the north?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Are we back to the twist, Mr. Chairman?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
672. Loans to the government of the Yukon Territory (hereinafter called the "territory") in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with such terms and conditions as the governor in council may approve, to enable that government to make mortgage loans to residents of the territory for the purchase or construction of low cost houses in the territory: and to authorize the commissioner in council of the territory, notwithstanding anything in the Yukon Act, to make ordinances in respect of the repayment by the government of the territory of loans made to it pursuant to this vote and in respect of the lending of money to residents of the territory for the purchase or construction of houses in the territory and the taking of security therefor by way of mortgage, $240,000.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Can the minister give us a short explanation of this?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Again, this vote is to provide capital for housing construction in the Northwest Territories. A capital sum is provided on a loan basis to the government of the Yukon territory in respect to housing construction. The program outlined in the other vote was a program providing for a more elaborate style of home. This program can be described as follows: The National Housing Act was intended to encourage the development of low rental housing of a type which is desirable in southern Canada. In the Yukon and in the Northwest Territories, however, the high cost of construction, of heating and of water and sewer services places the National Housing Act standards well beyond the ability to pay
(Mr. Dinsdale.)

of the majority of residents. Even with the new second mortgage proposals approved by parliament with the further supplementary estimates in March, 1961, a very large number of residents of the northern territories cannot afford National Housing Act standards. Costs in the north will not likely permit these people to achieve these standards for probably 20 years and interim measures are required.
Special housing programs subsidized by the federal government are already under way for the Indians and Eskimos of the north. The latest estimates place the white population at 11,500 in the Yukon and at 9,400 in the Northwest Territories, a total of 21,100 people.
In addition to the Eskimo and Indian populations there are group centres in the north not taken care of by the program that we have already outlined so that this item No. 672 is designed to fill the gap among those special categories of northern settlers.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
674. Loans to the government of the Northwest Territories (hereinafter called the "territories") In the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with such terms and conditions as the governor in council may approve, to enable that government to make mortgage loans to residents of the territories for the purchase or construction of low cost houses in the territories; and to authorize the commissioner in council of the territories, notwithstanding anything in the Northwest Territories Act, to make ordinances in respect of the repayment by the government of the territories of loans made to it pursuant to this vote and in respect of the lending of money to residents of the territories for the purchase or construction of houses in the territories and the taking of security therefor by way of mortgage, $240,000.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, this is quite a large item. Will the minister tell us what this is for?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, this vote provides for a loan of $150,000 to the government of the Northwest Territories subject, of course-


Gordon Minto Churchill: You are on the next one.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Is this 674?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: The other vote, Mr. Chairman, covered the Yukon territory. This present vote, as it indicates, provides the same services for the Northwest Territories. There are two territories north of the sixtieth parallel, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon territory.


Mr. Garland:: Could the minister give the committee any information as to the cost of housing on a per square foot basis in the area to which this vote relates?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, I do not think the hon. gentleman is really serious when

he asks me that question. But if he wishes the details of the housing program perhaps I can supply him with an outline of what the program is designed to do although I cannot give him the cost per square foot.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is not the
question. That is a very devious digression.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, I do not have the cost per square foot at my disposal. I shall be glad to obtain that information. I might have the costs per square head but not per square foot.


Erik Nielsen: Mr. Chairman, in all reason I think the hon. member for Nipissing realizes-


Hédard-J. Robichaud: The minister has a new parliamentary secretary. What is he paying you?


Erik Nielsen: -that the costs per square foot in the north are going to vary from Alert Bay to Whitehorse as much as they do from St. John's, Newfoundland, to Vancouver.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That does not answer the question. I suggest to the parliamentary secretary that he should allow the minister to answer the questions and we would get ahead much faster.


John Richard Garland: Yes. It would be interesting to put another question to the minister with the permission of the hon. member for the Yukon.
We in this committee are interested in knowing about these matters. As I understand it the federal government does not enter into negotiation. This money is for lending purposes only, is that right?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Yes, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Nipissing takes a very reasonable approach to this matter. These programs are, of course, handled by the respective territorial governments. In the Northwest Territories the money is lent to the territorial government and it is repayable, of course. The territorial government administers the program and, as I have already intimated, if the hon. member would like to have the details concerning the specific costs of the program I would be happy to provide them to him. I do not have that information at my fingertips but I could give him a general outline of what this particular scheme is attempting to do, if he would be interested.


John Richard Garland: Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to delay the committee. I was interested only in attempting to arrive at an understanding of the amount of subsidization or assistance
Supply-Public Works
that is provided. For instance, what is the rate of interest charged on the moneys advanced?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: The rate of interest is the going rate of interest plus the cost of financing the loan which would bring it up to something like 7J per cent in the territories.


John Richard Garland: Federal money is made available in the territories?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Gordon Campbell Chown: That completes the supplementary estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. We turn now to the supplementary estimates of the Department of Public Works.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Where is the minister?


Gordon Minto Churchill: The minister is unavoidably absent but I am taking his place and I know the official opposition will co-operate.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Is the parliamentary secretary here?


Gordon Minto Churchill: I believe the parliamentary secretary is in hospital.


Mr. Thrasher:: He is quite ill following an accident.


Gordon Campbell Chown: The committee will now consider vote No. 655.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Public buildings construction and services- Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, public buildings listed in the details of the estimates, including expenditures on works on other than federal property, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects -further amounts required-
655.	Nova Scotia, $1.
(Translation):


Mr. Caron:: Mr. Chairman, we are now on item-
I regret that the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Walker) is not here this evening, because I would have liked to address my remarks to him personally.
I see we are on item 655, but-

I thought this was the vote relating to public buildings construction and services. That is the first item that comes under the Department of Public Works. I particularly wanted to discuss the construction of buildings and repairs. This seems to relate to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. I can wait until we reach the vote relating to buildings in this region. I wanted to make general remarks about construction and repairs.

Supply-Public Works


Mr. Bourgei:: I understand that the Department of Public Works has received numerous protests about this item relating to a public building at Reserve Mines. I wonder whether the acting minister could give the committee some information about the protests and what has been the decision of the department.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The decision of the department is very firm. No protests have been brought to my attention.


Maurice Bourget: Well, there have been protests. The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate raised a question about this in the house a week or so ago. He also mentioned that protests had been sent to the department. The new building was put in a location that is not exactly in the centre of the city and was also on the wrong side of the road. I wonder whether the minister has that information.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I understand some protests were received and were given careful consideration. The Postmaster General and his officials were consulted with regard to this and the best site possible was chosen for the location of the post office.


Maurice Bourget: According to the protests the best site was not chosen. The old post office was located in the centre of the town. The information we have received-and we understand the department has received it, too-is that the new location is approximately 300 or 400 feet from the centre of the town and is also on the wrong side of the road. It is dangerous for school children because they would have to cross the street in order to reach the post office. I wonder whether inquiry has been made after protests were received by the department and whether a final decision has been reached.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I appreciate the interest of the hon. member. However, this matter was dealt with on March 6, on a question asked on the orders of the day by the hon. member for Trinity and answered by the Minister of Public Works along the lines which I have just now indicated when as found at page 1516 of Hansard he stated:
The site which has been picked is the most popular site, the safest site, and the site that pleases most of the people of Reserve Mines,-


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister has not been touched by the fact that the protestants in this matter were the Royal Canadian Legion. I confess I do not know anything personally about the two sites or anything of that sort. However, there seems to be a steady stream of protests, public meetings and so on. As the minister probably knows, this post office

was cancelled last year and has been reinstated this year. The government is definitely satisfied that this is the best place to put it, then.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, public buildings listed in the details of the estimates, including expenditures on works on other than federal property, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects -further amounts required-
656.	New Brunswick, $375,000.
Hédard-J. Robichaud: Will the amount of $375,000 mentioned here be sufficient to complete the additions and alterations to the public building in Moncton? Can the minister give some detail as to how this amount will be spent?


Gordon Minto Churchill: This amount will meet the present requirements for this fiscal year. In the main estimates for next year there is another sum to take full care of the further work that must be done.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
657.	Improvements generally and miscellaneous buildings-not more than $25,000 to be expended on any one project without the approval of treasury board, $125,000.
Alexis Pierre Caron: I think this is the item on which I can speak in general terms on construction and improvements.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, as I said a while ago, I am sorry that the Minister of Public Works is not in the house this evening to discuss his department's estimates. However, even though owing to his absence I have to shorten my remarks, I cannot refrain from suggesting that, if his estimates have apparently taken more time than the others, it is probably because of his own attitude. He behaves in this house as if he had been in Quebec during the most glorious days of the Union Nationale. He sees nothing but beauty and greatness in his achievements and seems inclined to attack everything that was done in the past. Yet, he is quite aware of the fact that, under his administration, certain contracts for the building of post offices have been awarded, not to the lowest tenderer, but to the one most suitable to the member for the constituency in question, following which he set forth false motives to justify his position.
In the course of his remarks, the minister talked about the money spent and the savings he managed to pile up since he became Minister of Public Works. But he did not dare tell us about the federal building at Elliot Lake. When it was realized that the

building was too large tor the city which had already fallen to about half of what it had been in the good days, well, it was decided to cut out one floor and in spite of that, Mr. Chairman, the total cost came up to $40,000 over the initial estimated cost for the whole building, including the two or three floors which were supposed to be built. Therefore, it is a little hard to accept the savings claimed by the minister.
However, what I particularly wish to discuss tonight is this. Out of some 15 projects provided for the national capital, in spite of the requests I made over and over again in this house, not a single one is located on the Quebec side of the national capital. One really wonders whether the minister has a bias against it. There are many reasons why those buildings should be erected on the Hull side.
Recently, the chamber of commerce, public bodies and the Hull city council submitted to the minister and the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) an exceedingly well prepared brief on the subject. In that brief were spelled out the major reasons why some of those buildings should be erected in Hull, and that, not only for the benefit of the city of Hull, but also to the advantage of the federal parliament.
Hull is therefore a part of the national capital area. A point to be noted is the fact that the whole city area is comprised within a three mile radius from parliament.
There is not a single part of the city of Hull outside that three mile radius.
And further on, in the same brief, we read the following:
The Hull authorities have realized for their part that it was their duty to work in co-operation with the national capital commission to make of that territory one of the most attractive. They have spared no effort nor resources to achieve that purpose.
That unity of action, that unity of development existing at the level of embellishment and townplanning, should we not find it also at the level of the development of the city? In other words, when the location of government services and federal buildings is being planned, should not the authorities of the capital take into account the particular position of Hull, its position in the national capital area, as well as its proximity to the centre of the federal administration?
And in the complete brief, from beginning to end, we find the best of reasons why the Quebec side of the national capital should be selected for the erection of some of those buildings.
We read again further on, in section 11:
The duty of making of Ottawa and Hull the living picture of the harmony existing between both races, between the two great provinces of confederation, between two cities, one French speaking and the other with an English speaking majority-
Supply-Public Works
-speaks in favour of erecting more buildings on the Hull side of the national capital.
And further on, the report adds: "Two main cities, Ottawa, in Ontario, and Hull, in Quebec: mixed population, different legislation and education systems, two provincial entities it is important to respect as far as the system of administration, the customs, the language and ideals are concerned. Far from causing us difficulties in our work, such a complex of human premises only stimulated our interest.
Those remarks are found at page 157 of Mr. Greber's report.
Still in the same brief, we find:
In an article written for the December 1961 issue of the Canadian Geographical Journal, Mr. Alan K. Hay, past chairman of the national capital commission, recognizes as an accepted fact that federal buildings be erected on both shores of the Ottawa.
This brief contains similar statements from front to back cover, and we see the same findings in Mr. Greber's reports and in the decisions of the national capital commission.
A little further on, the brief says:
These important construction projects constitute a practical means to contribute to urban renewal and, indeed, to city improvement. It is in the interest of Ottawa that its next door neighbour be as beautiful as possible.
The federal policy of decentralization of government services should show a certain balance, because the expansion on the Ottawa side will soon reach its saturation point. It would be advisable to consider now the Quebec side.
On that side, large tracts of land are still available only a short distance away from the center of the federal administration. Essential city services could easily be obtained. (The city of Ottawa is complaining about the high cost of the services it has to provide to federal buildings, because of the long distances.)
The federal government must promote a certain unity between the two main partners in the development of the national capital area, that is between Hull and Ottawa.
As you may notice, Mr. Chairman, all such reports are seriously prepared, well thought out and quite well presented.
In addition, it is stated that the buildings which would be erected on the Hull side would be only a mile away from the parliament buildings, from the heart of the national capital, whereas some are being erected at present at a distance of more than three or four miles as the crow flies from the centre of the capital.
This makes it abundantly clear that some of these buildings should be built on the Quebec side.
Following Mr. Greber's reports, Mr. Hay's observations and all the representations that were made in the past, why did not the minister find it appropriate to build some buildings in more suitable places, on the Quebec side for example, even if it had been only one or two buildings out of 15.

Supply-Public Works
Mr. Chairman, I wonder, and so do many of my colleagues, if the minister is not prejudiced against Quebec.
Mr. Chairman, I have asked myself that question, especially after having noticed the minister's attitude during the famous investigation made by the public accounts committee about the printing bureau in Hull. The present Minister of Public Works, who was then the executioner of the government within that committee, first asked Major General Young to prove his qualifications as an engineer and then asked him the following question, as shown in the proceedings for Friday, August 8, 1958, of the standing committee on public accounts:
Q. Could you tell us why that location was chosen lor the national printing bureau in Hull?
That was the first question asked, Mr. Chairman. Why did we build on that side, on the Hull side? In my opinion, that goes to show there was something in the minister's mind that most of the people from Quebec could not consider as too flattering and too commendable. That is why I am coming back to that subject again.
It was suggested that Hull was not an ideal location and that the construction of the printing bureau was a scandal.
In order to prove that those allegations are false, I ask hon. members to refer to items published in 1959 in the Citizen and Le Droit. Those are statements made by Mr. Raymond Blattenberger, whose position in the United States is similar to that of the Queen's printer in Canada.
The article read as follows:
I would hope that we would retain the services of the architect, said he. Nothwithstanding what was said last year during the investigation carried out by a parliamentary committee, the architect did a good job, according to Mr. Blattenberger. Indeed, he added, the functional organization of Canada's national printing bureau is much better than what we have in the States.
In my opinion, this testimony of an expert is just as good as some of those which were given at the time. Even though certain things and certain additional expenses which had to be made gave rise to some criticism, I am sure we would not have to do too much research to show that the present government has made expenses which were much more extravagant than those we are accused of having made at that time.
Mr. Chairman, I would have much more to say on the matter if the minister were in the house, but I do not want to take up too much of the time of the committee. However, I trust that this government, for the little time it will remain in power, will try to correct that situation by giving something to that Quebec district.
If it does not do so before the next election, I am convinced that the Liberal party, which

will form the next government, will see to it itself.


Mr. Paul:: Do you think that if the Liberal party happened to take over, the building of the interprovincial bridge would proceed as quickly as it did under the St. Laurent administration?


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, it is very easy for me to answer that question. I may say that, since 1953, the Ottawa government was ready to build the bridge in co-operation with the Ontario government. But Mr. Duplessis himself told me: "If Ottawa wants to have bridges, let them build them. As far as we are concerned, we shall not build any."
Only the election of the Lesage government in Quebec made it possible for an arrangement to be made between Ottawa, Quebec and Ontario for the building of that bridge. The Union Nationale did nothing for that project.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, may I be allowed another question? Would the hon. member for Hull inform the committee whether he shared the views of the previous minister of public works (Mr. Winters), who decided to build federal buildings ten miles away from parliament hill, although the city of Hull was right at the door?


Alexis Pierre Caron: Whether it was the fault of the Hon. Mr. Green, of the Hon. Mr. Winters or of the Hon. Mr. Walker, every time a government has gone beyond reasonable limits instead of coming into the Quebec side, I have taken strong exception to it


Mr. Flynn:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to deal briefly with a statement made by the hon. member for Hull, who accuses the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Walker) of being opposed to the construction of government buildings in the province of Quebec. He has only brought forward, as evidence, a question put by the Minister of Public Works during the inquest concerning the national printing bureau made by the committee on public accounts. It seems that the hon. member for Hull is basing his contention on a question put to Major General Young: "Why was this site chosen"?
We know that such a question on the selection of a proper site for the building of the printing bureau made sense, if we consider the springs which started to run afterward and which required very expensive additional work. It is absolutely unfair of the hon. member for Hull to have drawn from that question the conclusion that the Minister of Public Works was opposed to the building of the printing bureau in Hull. I do not object to the speech of the hon. member, but I would ask him to kindly not adduce such a weak argument, which in no way justifies him to draw such a conclusion.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Chairman, I did not want to read the whole evidence of the inquiry on the matter. If I had carried on my reading, you would have realized the way the question was put, because Major General Young replied as follows:
Mr. Chairman, two factors seem to have come into play at the time. One was the decision of the then government to extend the jurisdiction of the federal district commission to the city of Hull and to the Hull area. The other factor was the necessity of building a national printing bureau.
Then the city of the Hull was mentioned.
And if the question had not been put along those lines, I feel that Major General Young, who is an intelligent man, would have thought advisable to mention the words "the city of Hull" in his answer.


Jacques Flynn: It is not the answer that provides a meaning to the question. In a question of location, the hon. member for Hull will certainly want to be fair and agree that there is no question of any province or city. I draw his attention to that fact, because I know that he wants to be fair in this regard and that he should not draw such a conclusion concerning the Minister of Public Works.


Mr. Leduc:: I heard the remarks of the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys (Mr. Flynn). I cannot see that he is consistent. If his government really wants government buildings to be constructed in Hull, let it show its good faith and build some.


Jacques Flynn: I have no objection, Mr. Chairman. I only wish to say that as far as my department is concerned, plans are now under consideration for the construction of some buildings on the Quebec side. The hon. member for Gatineau will recognize that the only point I wanted to make was that you could not draw such a conclusion. I do not intend to discuss this indefinitely. I only want hon. members to be fair to the Minister of Public Works.


Rodolphe Leduc: I want to be fair to the minister, but I do point out that since the Conservative government took over, not one building has been erected on the Quebec side.
(Text):


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
658.	Maintenance and operation of public buildings and grounds-further amount required, $1,000,000.
Gordon Campbell Chown: Shall vote 658 carry?
Supply-Public Works


John Whitney Pickersgill: No. This is $1 million. We can all remember that great estimator, the Minister of Public Works, the man who spent so much time telling us how incompetent was the department over which he now presides. It seems to me that another whole million dollars just for maintenance and operation of public grounds and buildings needs some tall explaining, and I hope the minister can give it.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I hope the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate will exercise a little restraint tonight.


An hon. Member:: How unusual that would be.


Gordon Minto Churchill: He can be very co-operative sometimes. I am sure my explanation will satisfy him completely. This is not a mis-judgment in estimating at all. It is an acceleration of work during the course of the winter months in order to provide employment, something with which everybody would agree.


John Whitney Pickersgill: An acceleration in maintenance?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, alterations, painting and decorating, repairs to plumbing, lighting and heating facilities. These are things being dealt with under this vote which can be done during the winter months. It was intended originally to do them during the next fiscal year but under the circumstances it seemed wise to do them now, and I am sure everybody is. in agreement with that policy.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is a summary explanation. One million dollars is still a large sum of money for maintenance and I would imagine even this government could do quite a lot of painting for $1 million. Certainly if this were being spent on some new structures that would be a different story. Does a large part of it represent the playing around with the west block, or is that a separate vote altogether?


Gordon Minto Churchill: It is separate. The restoration of that great historic building, the west block, comes under a separate vote and I am sure the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate who has a sense of history, would not want to leave it on the record that this is playing around with the west block, as if it were some careless treatment of it. He knows as an historian-and this is one thing I like about him although I cannot think of any-.

Supply-Public Works thing more at the moment-how important it is to preserve that historic building.
Under this particular vote repairs and alterations are carried out to an enormous number of government owned buildings, and they are not only the matters I mentioned such as painting, decorating and so on. There are also alterations. I feel that the hon. member does not seriously want a detailed explanation of this. There are numerous items for the repair and items for the upkeep of buildings in the total vote, and the main estimates ordinarily run into $6 million.


John Whitney Pickersgill: What the minister is saying is that it is only a million.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Oh no; that is a Liberal expression.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister is pretty liberal with the million dollars, but I cannot let the minister's remarks about the west block go unchallenged.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I thought you would agree with me.


John Whitney Pickersgill: What the government is doing with the west block is a terrible mistake and an uncalled for extravagance. What should have been done was what was originally suggested, take the building down, mark the stones, the outer stones, build a proper inner structure-all of which could have been done for less than a quarter of what this is going to cost before they are finished with it-and then put up the external stones so that it would resemble the building now there. I predict that this is going to turn out to be one of the worst errors of judgment in the field of construction or reconstruction, ever made by any Canadian government.


Richard Albert Bell: What was done with the old supreme court building?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The proper thing was done with the old supreme court building. It was an old stable and should have been torn down, and the proper thing was done.


Richard Albert Bell: It was not done.


An hon. Member:: Due regard for our historic sites.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, "le palais de danse". We know the kind of historic sites you mean.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Vandalism-a parking lot out of the old supreme court building.


John Whitney Pickersgill: When the minister gets back from Arizona Charlie's-


Edmund Davie Fulton: That is where you have been all afternoon.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -I would like to make some observations about the west block. There has been a mistaken story in the newspapers about the office of Sir John Macdonald in the west block, but the fact of the matter is that Sir John Macdonald never had an office in the west block at any time at all.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Was it the crystal ball that told you that?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The Minister of Veterans Affairs and I will agree on that. This was checked very carefully several years ago when this myth first started. I think it may have been Alexander Mackenzie, the first Liberal prime minister who was also minister of public works, who had an office there but Sir John A. Macdonald never had an office in the west block. This is perhaps not very important but the minister challenged me and I am responding.


Maurice Bourget: This item also includes materials. Could the minister let us know how much is for the purchase of materials?


Gordon Minto Churchill: I am not sure I could give that information to the hon. member tonight. I shall refer the question to the Minister of Public Works and perhaps he could get in touch with the hon. member. The information I have in front of me is not broken down into materials, etc.


Maurice Bourget: I think the materials represent quite an important amount. A few minutes ago the minister stressed that these projects were undertaken to provide winter works, and I would like to know how much of the money is for the purchase of materials and how much has been granted for projects. Maybe the minister has no information about the quantity of material that has been bought, but could he tell us the number of projects, or the number of individual projects costing over $2,500, and where they have been undertaken?


Gordon Minto Churchill: I shall give you an example. In Newfoundland there are six projects in federal buildings and post offices, running from $1,750 in one instance up to $4,200 in another. That is the type of work that is being done.


Maurice Bourget: What work was done there? Was it repairs to the plumbing?


Gordon Minto Churchill: No; it was interior painting at Carbonear, Newfoundland; interior painting at St. Anthony, Newfoundland; improved lighting at Bishop's Falls; a lock-box lobby and terrazzo work at Stephenville; toilet facilities at Walkerville; interior painting at St. Lawrence. That is the type of work that is being done during the winter season.
In Nova Scotia, interior painting at the Ralston building at Halifax, $8,000; interior painting at the federal building at Yarmouth, $8,000, and changes to accommodation on the eighth floor of the Ralston building in Halifax, $1,600. I can go on. Does the hon. member wish further items?


Maurice Bourget: No, I was just asking the minister about the projects over $25,000.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The only one that I can find is exactly $25,000. That is at Blackpool, in the province of Quebec, and it is for masonry repairs.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Is that a dance hall?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, as a socialist and a member of a party that appreciates Canadian history and tradition and does not support the materialist conception of life, believing that men live by other than bread alone, we support the preservation of the west block and the Gothic beauty and symmetry on parliament hill.


John Whitney Pickersgill: So do I, but I like to see it being done economically.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Mr. Chairman, could the minister tell us whether those projects are being done by daily work or by tender; and if by tender, how are the tenders being called?


Gordon Minto Churchill: By contract; by public tender.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I would like some information from the minister on this matter of the office of Sir John A. Macdonald. This matter has been referred to by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, who said this was not at any time Sir John A. Macdonald's office. I believe it would not be to our advantage to maintain as a symbol something that was not true. Have any records been looked into in connection with this matter? Has the government ascertained whether this was in fact Sir John A. Macdonald's office; and if it was not, what was the reason for doing this?
Supply-Public Works


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, I will refer the hon. member's question to the Minister of Public Works, who has perhaps delved into this topic. If he has not the answer, we know where to find it.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Tell him to be sure to get the right Tilley.


William Arnold Peters: I am not really happy about what the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has said in regard to this matter. If what he said is right, I do not think we should necessarily go to his files to ascertain the true circumstances; I am sure thqre are records kept that would prove whether or not this is right. We are quite happy to accept the minister's word that he will look into this matter and report.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Mr. Chairman, in reply to my question of a few minutes ago the minister said all those projects were being done by tender. Are we to understand that notwithstanding the amount of the project, whether it was $1,600, $8,000 or $25,000, public tenders were called for every one?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, I am informed that tenders were called for the accelerated work which is outlined here.


Maurice Bourget: For all the projects, even those of $1,000 or $2,000?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, I am told that tenders were invited on all these projects, even the small ones.


Maurice Bourget: I am asking whether public tenders were asked for on all those projects.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I am informed that tenders were invited from known contractors in the area for these very small amounts-


Maurice Bourget: Up to what amounts?


Gordon Minto Churchill: -and with regard to the very large amounts, of course, public tenders are called by advertisement.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Development engineering services-
659.	Roads and bridges-maintenance and operation-further amount required, $150,000.
Maurice Bourget: In connection with vote 659, Mr. Chairman, could the minister tell us what bridges were repaired under that item, or what roads were constructed.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The Chaudiere bridge is the one that is referred to.


Thomas Miller Bell: Of great advantage to Ottawa.


Maurice Bourget: Is the whole item of $150,000
for Chaudiere bridge repairs?


Gordon Minto Churchill: That is right.

Supply-Public Works


Hubert Badanai: Mr. Chairman, the municipal council of the city of Fort William have from time to time endeavoured to obtain consideration from the federal government on some of their more important requirements, among which are two bridges. A few months ago I received a resolution passed by the council of the corporation of the city of Fort William which reads as follows:
That we petition the federal government through the Lakehead harbour commission to begin construction of a bridge across the Kaministikwia river as an extension of Eighth avenue to the City road to provide access to highway 61.
The construction of a bridge is essential to provide an alternate approach to the islands-


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, I hesitate to interrupt the hon. gentleman but the federal responsibility applies to international bridges or interprovincial bridges, and I think the hon. member is referring to bridges which are not in those two categories.


Hubert Badanai: Mr. Chairman, I would point out that the bridge in question has to do with road access to the new seaway terminal which is located between the two islands. The islands in the city of Fort William provide part of the port facilities under the jurisdiction of the lakehead harbour commission. The lack of adequate bridges over the Kaministikwia and the Mission rivers is one of the major and most serious obstacles which is retarding the development of our city's growth and its industrial potential.
The lakehead planning board wrote to me last year in connection with this matter. I should like to quote from that letter:
The traffic report from the lakehead, 1960, indicated the need for the all year round permanent bridge across the Kaministikwia river in the third stage of the road proposal. Subsequent to the report, the technical co-ordinating committee met with the consultants and agreed that
(a)	because of the crisis potential of the existing bridge at James street in that it can be taken out of action at any time by a navigational accident:
(b)	and in view of the agreement by the city of Fort William and the municipality of Neebing to provide fire protection services in the South Neebing area, which protection would be meaningless in a traffic situation development at James street bridge;
(c)	and in view of the emergency measures proposals and civil defence requirement which is certainly not in the happiest situation due to (a) above;
(d)	and in view of the increase in tourist and general traffic coming along the international highway 61, meeting in a traffic bottleneck at the James street bridge, the planning board asks that the proposed bridge over the Kaministikwia river receive immediate consideration.
I have indicated on previous occasions the need for a bridge over the Mission river. We do expect some assistance from the federal government in this connection because this bridge has to do with communication between

the two islands over navigable waters, which are under federal jurisdiction.
The Premium Ore Company, which is headed by Cyrus Eaton, the chairman of the board of Steep Rock Iron Mines, has an option on an extensive piece of land on Mission island for such a project. But apart from the great development which can be expected to follow the provision of these new bridges, I ask the minister to consider the situation which would arise if anything were to happen to either of the single bridges that are serving at the present time. These bridges were built some 65 years ago and were never meant to carry present day traffic, to say nothing of the heavy oil motor tankers and continental transport trucks now being used on this route.
Following successful representations made to Sir Alex. Gibb and Associates, consultants to the ocean terminal dock project, to have the Fort William temporary access road into the terminal site-as distinct from the Port Arthur temporary access-changed to a point to cross the Neebing river at the extension of 10th avenue, it now appears necessary to look more closely at this intended access road and put it on a more permanent footing. The reason 10th avenue was advocated for this temporary access way was because 10th avenue had previously been selected as the final approximate location of the proposed lakeshore highway, at least in this section of the city of Fort William. The shadow plan for the lakehead calls for the eventual construction of a main highway crossing the two islands and linking up with the mainland road system.
Apart from the fact that those portions of this proposed highway in the city of Fort William territorial limits, when built will undoubtedly accelerate the opening of the islands to full industrial development, the proximity of the proposed ocean terminal site to this highway, as extended into Port Arthur, is another reason why we should not delay in furthering this highway proposal with all due dispatch.
The chief stumbling block to the implementation of this proposal would appear to be the need for the two new bridges to complete this project which, when built, would complete this highway within Fort William's corporate limits. The bridges should preferably be of the high level type to ensure maximum efficiency. The efficiency of bascule or swing bridges would always be at the mercy of every ship that entered that part of Fort William's harbour encompassed by the Kam, the McKellar and the Mission rivers.
Current road access into any part of the 30 odd miles of lakeshore harbour development, both existing and potential, is in an

extremely unfavourable state of development, and is not as befits a modern and growing port of the importance of the Canadian lakehead.
For these reasons I beg the minister to give consideration to this matter of assistance toward bridge construction in order that we may have free access to the new lakehead harbour which is nearing completion at the moment. Unless there are adequate bridges the dock facilities will be severely impeded. This has been brought out by the consultant engineers who are on the job supervising the seaway terminal at the lakehead. The minister may not have the answer right now, but within the next few days, or as soon as possible, he may be able to give us the answer to this problem. I have had the opportunity of bringing this matter before the Minister of Public Works but unfortunately I have been unable to arouse any degree of enthusiasm for this particular project. However, I believe it is absolutely necessary and I trust the government will show a change of heart with regard to this project.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
660.	Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for including expenditures on works on other than federal property: a maximum of $15,000 may be expended in respect of any one work and. with the approval of treasury board, that maximum may be increased to $25,000-further amount required, $190,000
Maurice Bourget: I understand this item has to do with small post offices. If so, will the minister give us a list of the small post offices which have been built?


Gordon Minto Churchill: This does refer to small post offices. If the hon. member will turn to Hansard of February 9 of this year he will find that a list of post offices per province is given.


Maurice Bourget: The item under consideration amounts to $190,000. I suppose that means about eight or nine post offices. The list would not be too long to put on the record.


Gordon Minto Churchill: There are ten post offices involved in this. They are: Abbotsford, Quebec; Valcourt, Quebec; Gogama, Ontario; Fort Erie, Ontario; Longlac, Ontario; Winnipeg Beach, Manitoba; Borden, Saskatchewan; Churchbridge, Saskatchewan; Hodgeville, Saskatchewan; Elk Point, Alberta.


Maurice Bourget: Can the minister tell the committee the average size of these post offices in square feet?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes. Eight hundred square feet net useable space.
Supply-J ustice


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wish to draw the attention of the committee to the fact that for some reason or other the government did not think it important to build any of the post offices listed, when the original list was published in Hansard, in two of the provinces. I draw attention to the fact that notwithstanding the strong representations which have been made, none of those post offices was being built in either Newfoundland or Prince Edward Island-that is, if the list to which the minister referred is the one about which I asked the Minister of Public Works at the time.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I will draw the attention of the Minister of Public Works to those remarks. It is not a matter of deliberate policy to exclude two provinces of the importance of Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, but post offices are built according to the number of people who are being served and the revenue which will result from them. However, this is an important point and one which deserves attention.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Would the minister be good enough to join his recommendation to my own that post offices be built at Hare Bay in Bonavista bay? I have been trying for four years to get the department to do something about that important and growing settlement. Action is doubly necessary now because that place is a settlement which suffered most from the fire, and a little extra work this spring would be extremely helpful to that community.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I am pleased to support any program which is for the benefit of the people generally, and the hon. member seems to have made out a very good case.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Paul Raymond Martineau: Vote No. 660 terminated the supplementary estimates of the Department of Public Works falling in this group. We will now proceed to a consideration of vote No. 661 which is concerned with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, pensions and other benefits.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Before the Acting Minister of Public Works leaves I think we should draw attention to the fact that when a minister shows some courtesy to the committee he gets his estimates through much more readily.
ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE Pensions and other benefits-
661.	To deem the election made by the late Benjamin Vinton Beddow on the 9th day of March, 1961 to be valid for all purposes of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act, notwithstanding that he was not medically examined as required by paragraph (b) of subsection (2) of section 7 of the said act, and to authorize the

Supply-Trade and Commerce payment of benefits to his widow as if he had taken and passed the medical examination so required, $1.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think we should have some explanation of this vote.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, the explanation of this vote is rather complicated. We have endeavoured in the explanatory note on page 7 of the supplementary estimates to reduce it to as short a compass as possible. What we are asking for is the authority of a dollar item, which I myself am very reluctant indeed to use but I think it is a proper case, to give authority to pay a pension to a widow who by virtue of a long and complicated series of administrative misfortunes and misunderstandings, coinciding as the events did with a change from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Continuation Act, would otherwise be deprived of her right to a pension.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Paul Raymond Martineau: The next item is vote No. 662, Department of Trade and Commerce.
DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND COMMERCE Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited-
662.	Payments in the 1961-62 and 1962-63 fiscal years under the contract that was entered into on the 24th day of November, 1961 between Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited on behalf of Her Majesty and Macassa Gold Mines Limited for the purchase by Her Majesty of uranium concentrates, $2,400,000.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, could we have with us the Minister of Trade and Commerce whose genial personality always contributes something to the committee, or is he, like the Minister of Public Works, off politicking somewhere?


Léon Balcer: He never does that.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I might just explain as Acting Minister of Trade and Commerce in the unavoidable absence of the Minister of Trade and Commerce that the parliamentary secretary has all the information here which the committee could desire and I myself will be present in the event there are some items which require further exploration.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The first question I should like to put to the learned parliamentary secretary, and I hope he will be able to answer it more effectively than his principal has ever been able to, is when the British contract is going to be completed?


Mr. Morris:: Mr. Chairman, perhaps I could introduce this item in a meaningful way by giving a very brief statement which will include an indication of the answer to the hon. gentleman's question.

The contract between Her Majesty, as represented by Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited, and Macassa Gold Mines limited for the purchase of uranium concentrates was entered into as a stopgap arrangement to enable Macassa to continue production of uranium for a period of six months after it had produced all the concentrates for delivery under its original contract. In this way, the closing of the mine, with its consequent effect on employment in the area, was prevented and the mine will be able to continue production until late in April, by which time it is expected that negotiations will have been completed with the United Kingdom for the purchase of 12,000 tons of uranium. When these negotiations are completed, the quantity of 342,000 pounds covered by the stopgap contract will form a part of Macassa's allocation under the United Kingdom contract.
The price to be paid Macassa for the 342,000 pounds is Macassa's actual cost of production, without profit, as established by the cost inspection services of the office of the comptroller of the treasury, unless it becomes a part of Macassa's allocation under the United Kingdom contract, in which case it will take the price applicable to Macassa's allocation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I thank the parliamentary secretary for that very lucid explanation, but I did not catch the date by which he anticipated the negotiations with the British would be completed. I think in giving that date he has gone a lot further than the minister ever has and I am sure we would like to have it right. Perhaps he would repeat the date.


Edmund Leverett Morris: Yes, Mr. Chairman. The item in the supplementary estimates covers a period until late April by which time, as I said earlier, it is expected that the negotiations with the United Kingdom will have been completed for the purchase of 12,000 tons of uranium.


William Arnold Peters: I know that the people connected with the Bicroft Uranium Mines Limited will be pleased to know there is a possibility that the United Kingdom contract will be completed in time to furnish a carry-on from the temporary arrangements that have been made. In my view the stockpiling arrangement made in this case was advantageous not only because it saved the government considerable expense but it provided a continuity.
Why is the agreement between Macassa and Eldorado rather than the principal mine, Bicroft. It is true that Macassa owns considerable shares and is a registered company in its own right. Why is the agreement with

Macassa, which is a profitable gold producing mine but certainly is not involved in the uranium industry?


Edmund Leverett Morris: The interest of Macassa Gold Mines in the Bicroft mine at Bancroft represents the interest which the government wishes to have recognized by means of the supplementary estimate. Macassa, to the best of my knowledge, has inherited the Bicroft mine so far as this uranium matter is concerned.


William Arnold Peters: That is surprising. I am curious how these things are arrived at. Bicroft has authorized capital of 4 million shares of which 3,057,475 are issued against the original capitalization. Of that amount Macassa owns only 440,000 shares and Renabie, a Macassa subsidiary, holds 360,000 shares. According to the record of issued shares it does not even have control of the company. I am still curious as to why Macassa has the contract.
Let me approach it from this angle. Is there any reason why Bicroft was not given the contract? Has it something to do with the fact that other producers in the area such as Faraday could not have been given the same kind of consideration?


Edmund Leverett Morris: The reason Faraday is not considered in this supplementary estimate is that Faraday's contract will not expire prior to the time we expect the United Kingdom negotiations to have been successfully completed.


Maurice Bourget: Can the parliamentary secretary tell us what is the price of concentrate per pound? Is the price mentioned in the contract?


Edmund Leverett Morris: The item in the supplemen-taries, $2,400,000, is intended to cover 342,000 pounds.


Maurice Bourget: About $8 a pound?


Edmund Leverett Morris: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Paul Raymond Martineau: Department of Transport, vote No. 663.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT Railway and steamship services-
663.	Construction or acquisition of auto-ferry vessels and equipment as listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended upon individual listed projects- further amount required, $71,885.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am sure the minister would like to tell us what this is all about. We always like to hear from the minister.
Supply-Transport


Léon Balcer: Mr. Chairman, this vote deals with the Pelee island ferry. The vote is in the amount of $46,860 for general alterations and additions to the ferry vessel Pelee Islander operating between Pelee island and the mainland in Ontario; and the remainder, $25,025 for modifications to the ferry vessel Lord Selkirk operating between Wood Island, Prince Edward Island, and Caribou, Nova Scotia. The remainder, namely $25,025, is for modifications to the ferry vessel Lord Selkirk operating between Wood Island, P.E.I. and Caribou, Nova Scotia.


Maurice Bourget: Can the minister tell us whether those contracts were allocated or whether they were given to the companies after tenders had been obtained in both cases?


Léon Balcer: As far as the Lord Selkirk is concerned, the alterations and modifications were done at Pictou, Nova Scotia. Unfortunately, I have not here the information to tell me whether it is an allocation or whether it was done by tender. However, my recollection is that both jobs were allocated.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder whether I could ask the minister this question; I appreciate the fact that it is perhaps not strictly relevant to the repairs to the Lord Selkirk. However, is the department giving any consideration to putting a new ferry on the Wood Island-Caribou service? As the minister very well knows, the service is quite inadequate, having regard to the demand for it at the present time. There is a great deal of agitation to have improvement in that service.


Léon Balcer: Yes, Mr. Chairman. A second ship for this service has been approved in principle by treasury board.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Does the minister think the contract is likely to be let quite soon so that it might perhaps be ready for the season of 1963?


Léon Balcer: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Air transport board-
664.	Subventions for air carriers as detailed in the estimates, $300,000.
John Whitney Pickersgill: I think perhaps the minister would wish to give some explanation of this item.


Léon Balcer: This $300,000 is a subsidy. It represents monthly subsidies of $25,000 being paid at the present time to Pacific Western Airlines covering operating losses on the prairie route on which are Edmonton, North Battleford, Prince Albert, Saskatoon and Regina. The committee might recall that this service was carried on for a long time by

Supply-Transport
Canadian Pacific Airlines and then was turned over to Pacific Western Airlines, One of the main sources of revenue was a mail contract. Unfortunately, this mail contract was terminated. I do not remember the exact date of its termination, but it was some time in 1960. As this route was not a money producing route with the loss of this mail contract, the company was faced with a rather large deficit. The company was obliged to withdraw from the service or to suspend the service. However, as in this area the service was considered to be essential and as no other air line was ready to carry on that service, the air transport board decided to give this subsidy of $25,000 a month. This subsidy is going to be paid until the air transport board makes its report on the prairie milk run route. This report should be made within a couple of months. As you know, Mr. Chairman, the air transport board has made a complete survey of all the regional carrier operations all across Canada starting with the eastern provinces. The last hearings were held a few weeks ago in the prairie provinces. Until this report on the prairie run is received, it is the intention to carry on paying the $25,000 a month to Pacific Western Airlines.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I suppose it would be considered a vicious attack to suggest that there was any connection whatsoever between the subsidy and the fact that this air line serves Prince Albert. I therefore would not think of drawing attention to that fact. But speaking seriously may I say this. As Your Honour is well aware, the question of the milk run in western Canada to which the minister refers and with which, as he pointed out, this matter is directly connected, is one on which I know my friend the hon. member for Lau-rier has a few observations he wishes to make. However, unfortunately because of an indisposition-


Gordon Minto Churchill: Is he politicking?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, he is not politicking. I wish he were but in fact he is not. Owing to an indisposition he was unable to be here today, but I hope he will be here tomorrow. I know he has one or two observations he wanted to make on this matter. As it appears to be ten o'clock, Mr. Chairman, perhaps we could pause at this point.
Item stands.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the house leader could tell us whether we shall be going on with these estimates tomorrow. I can hardly forbear to remark that but for the intervention of his friends we might have finished them today.
Mr. Pallet!: The hon. member just admitted he is waiting for the hon. member for Laurier.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I must thank the house for the amount of business it accomplished today; it was very encouraging indeed. It might have been done much earlier had there been more co-operation on the opposite side. There are six items left in the present supplementary estimates which we will conclude, I hope, tomorrow, followed by the necessary appropriation act. Then we will carry on with the final supplementary estimates which have been distributed.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Has the minister any suggestions about next week?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Just that we get more business done in the house than we did this week.


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

[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:

[Stage Direction]
National parks branch-
National parks and	historic sites and monuments-
648.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and equipment-further amount required. $2,500,000.
Water resources branch-
649.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and equipment-further amount required, $40,000.
Northern administration branch-
Welfare and industrial divisions-
650.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and equipment-further amount required, $270,000.
Yukon territory-
651.	Operation and maintenance-to extend the purposes of vote 302 of the main estimates for 1961-62 to include the grants detailed in these estimates, $22,000.
Northern administration branch-
671.	Loans	to	the	government	of the	Yukon
territory in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the governor in council, $500,000.
672.	Loans	to	the	government	of the	Yukon
territory (hereinafter called the "territory") in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with such terms and conditions as the governor in council may approve, to enable that government to make mortgage loans to residents of the territory for the purchase or construction of low cost houses in the territory; and to authorize the commissioner in council of the territory, notwithstanding anything in the Yukon Act, to make ordinances in respect of the repayment by the government of the territory of loans made to it pursuant to this vote and in respect of the lending of money to residents of the territory for the purchase or construction of houses in the territory and the taking of security therefor by way of mortgage, $240,000.
673.	Loans to the government of the Northwest Territories in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the governor in council, $150,000.
674.	Loans to the government of the Northwest Territories (hereinafter called the "territories") in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with such terms and conditions as the governor in council may approve, to enable that government to make mortgage loans to residents of the territories for the purchase or construction of low cost houses in the territories; and to authorize the commissioner in council of the territories, notwithstanding anything in the Northwest Territories Act, to make ordinances in respect of the repayment by the government of the territories of loans made to it pursuant to this vote and in respect of the lending of money to residents of the territories for the purchase or construction of houses in the territories and the taking of security therefor by way of mortgage, $240,000.
Supply-Items Passed

[Stage Direction]
Public buildings construction and services-
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, public buildings listed in the details of the estimates, including expenditures on works on other than federal property, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects- further amounts required-
655.	Nova Scotia, $1.
656.	New Brunswick, $375,000.
657.	Improvements generally and miscellaneous buildings-not more than $25,000 to be expended on any one project without the approval of treasury board, $125,000.
658.	Maintenance and operation of public buildings and grounds-further amount required, $1,000,000.
Development engineering services-
659.	Roads and bridges-maintenance and operation-further amount required, $150,000.
General-
660.	Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for including expenditures on works on other than federal property; a maximum of $15,000 may be expended in respect of any one work and, with the approval of treasury board, that maximum may be increased to $25,000-further amount required, $190,000.
ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE Pensions and other benefits-
661.	To deem the election made by the late Benjamin Vinton Beddow on the 9th day of March, 1961, to be valid for all purposes of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act, notwithstanding that he was not medically examined as required by paragraph (b) of subsection (2) of section 7 of the said act, and to authorize the payment of benefits to his widow as if he had taken and passed the medical examination so required, $1.

[Stage Direction]
B-General-
Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited-
662.	Payments in the 1961-62 and 1962-63 fiscal years under the contract that was entered into on the 24th day of November, 1961 between Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited on behalf of Her Majesty and Macassa Gold Mines Limited for the purchase by Her Majesty of uranium concentrates, $2,400,000.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Railway and steamship services-
663.	Construction or acquisition of auto-ferry vessels and equipment as listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended upon individual listed projects- further amount required, $71,885.


[Stage Direction]
I begin my statement today on behalf of Canada by thanking the acting secretary general of the United Nations for the excellent facilities which have been made available. The presence of his representative at this table is of great significance. It emphasizes that all members of the United Nations are vitally concerned with the problem of disarmament. In my opinion, we should never lose sight of this fact in the course of our negotiations. It is obvious that the main purpose of the United Nations is to keep the peace. Of course, under present conditions, that means that disarmament becomes the most important problem of the United Nations, and that forum will always have the main responsibility for bringing about disarmament. There are several reasons why this conference has an unprecedented opportunity to make rapid progress toward agreement.
First, there is now an agreement on the basic principles of disarmament unanimously endorsed by the United Nations general assembly. For the first time there is a common understanding about the objective to be reached, and the guide lines which should be followed in working toward it. As a result, we are in a position to move quickly from a general exchange of views to a detailed consideration of measures which will actually stop the competition in armaments and bring about substantial reductions from the present levels. In my personal opinion the problem of stopping the development of more deadly weapons is perhaps more important than that of bringing about measures of disarmament, although of course both problems are of vital importance.
Second, the new negotiating committee is representative of all major geographical areas of the world. This reflects the fact that disarmament is not the concern only of the great powers, but of all countries, however large or however small. The presence at this table of the representatives of eight additional countries is, in my opinion, a major advantage. They will, I am sure, play a valuable role in avoiding the stalemates which have so often developed in past disarmament conferences. Also, the fresh perspective which they bring to the negotiations will assist materially in the search for early agreement. And may I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the presence of these eight other nations has already been of deep significance as well as of great help to the opening phases of this conference.
Third, we had just ten days ago the unanimous finding of the United Nations committee on the economic and social consequences of disarmament that general disarmament, far from producing adverse economic effects, would be an immense contribution to the advancement of human well-being. There can surely be no doubt that the reallocation of even part of the enormous resources now devoted to expenditure on armaments would open up unlimited possibilities for the improvement of living standards in all the nations, whatever their social system or whatever their stage of development.
Fourth, past experience has made us fully aware of the grave consequences which will follow if we permit these negotiations to fail or even to lose momentum. It is now almost two years since the work of the ten nation committee was broken off. This period has been marked by renewed international tension and a nuclear arms race of increased intensity, of which the resumption of nuclear testing is the most serious aspect. An even more serious deterioration in the international situation will result if our efforts here cannot bring about rapid agreement.
Finally, the increasingly devastating power of modern weapons has placed a new responsibility on the representatives who are gathered here. The very fact that all of us around this table fully recognize the immeasurable catastrophe which would result from a conflict involving such weapons in itself provides new motives for meeting the challenge which faces us. In my opinion we cannot allow another failure to establish an effective system of disarmament. If we do not succeed on this occasion, the world may not be given another chance.
As far as my delegation is concerned, we have come to Geneva with the firm intention to continue working without interruption until a comprehensive system of general disarmament has been agreed. At the same time we hope and expect to see initial agreements reached with the least possible delay. This committee is obliged to report to the United Nations disarmament commission by June 1, and the peoples of the world will expect a substantial measure of progress by then. The time factor is of vital significance in our work, and we should at once start to search for common ground. This is a case where, as we say in Canada, time is of the essence.

The agreed statement of principles forms the basis for discussion and negotiation at this conference. It follows that all measures of disarmament must be carefully phased and in balance with one another; and that reductions of national armaments must be accompanied by improved international arrangements for maintaining peace and security.
Two principal documents are available to the committee. There is the program of disarmament put forward by the United States on September 25, 1961. Canada participated in the drafting of this plan, and fully supports it. The United States representative has emphasized that these proposals have been put forward in a spirit of flexibility and compromise. That is a point to which Canada attaches great importance. In other words, these proposals are not put forward on a take it or leave it basis. There is also the draft treaty advanced by the representative of the Soviet union, based on the Soviet plan of September 23, 1960.
These two documents are the result of a long period of study. This is not to say, however, that either of them represents the only solution to this disarmament problem. The eight new members of the committee will undoubtedly make suggestions of their own. Their views should provide a further valuable contribution to the solution of the problems before us, and they will receive very careful study by my delegation.
In considering the two plans which are now before us we should first seek out common elements on which there is a chance of early agreement. The United States proposals are presented in the form of a "program", and the Soviet proposals in the language of a "draft treaty", but this is largely a difference of presentation. The substantive provisions contained in the two documents parallel one another in several respects, and I suggest that we should take full advantage of this fact in trying to define and enlarge the area of agreement between the two sides.
Starting from the joint statement of principles we should search out specific problems on which the two sides are close to agreement, and try to settle these as quickly as possible. Having achieved this, we should then go on to study problems on which the two sides are further apart-first to clarify differences, and then to resolve them. In this way, my delegation believes, we can systematically move toward a comprehensive system of disarmament and complete the fulfilment of the tasks which have been given us.
I have suggested that we should begin our work with an examination of areas in which rapid agreement might be achieved. There are several examples which could be cited. The following list will help to illustrate the approach which my delegation has in mind.
The first example: The United States and Soviet proposals both provide for means of ensuring that rockets and satellites placed in orbit or launched into outer space will be used for peaceful purposes only. Provision is also made for advance notification of an international disarmament organization about all such launchings. Both sides have an overriding interest in reaching an understanding which will ensure that scientific advances in this field serve only the cause of peace. There is therefore, Mr. Chairman, every reason why agreement should be reached in short order. And may I point out that just this morning we read in the newspapers a report of a United States offer to the Soviet union of a joint space plan. All of this indicates that it should be fairly easy to reach agreement on this particular subject.
The second example: The United States proposals contain suggestions for observation posts and other procedures designed to reduce the risk of surprise attack or accidental war. Specific proposals to this effect do not appear in the new Soviet draft treaty, but similar ideas were advanced in the Soviet plan of September 23, 1960 and again in the memorandum submitted by the Soviet union to the United Nations on September 26 of last year, 1961. The fear that war could break out through accident or miscalculation is a continuing source of international tension which increases as more and more dangerous weapons are developed. Both sides have a vital interest in removing these fears as soon as possible. Both sides have proposed measures which would provide means of doing so. Further negotiation, and a willingness to compromise, could produce agreement in this field.
The third example: The United States plan calls for technical studies of means to deal with chemical and bacteriological weapons. The Soviet union has also put forward a suggestion for joint studies in this area in its plan of September 23, 1960. In the opinion of my delegation, such technical studies should begin immediately. On the basis of existing proposals, it would appear that full agreement already exists on this point, and that there is no reason for further debate before concrete action is taken.
The fourth example: Provision is made in both plans-although at different stages-to cease production of fissile material for weapons purposes and to transfer existing stocks to peaceful uses. The increased amount of the initial end reductions proposed by the United States representative here on March 19 means that by the time the second stage is completed stockpiles will have been very greatly reduced. This fact brings the United States position much closer to the Soviet view that all such stockpiles should be eliminated in stage
[Stage Direction]
II. In our opinion, further negotiation could bring about full agreement.
The fifth example: Both plans contain proposals designed to prohibit the wider spread of nuclear weapons. A resolution submitted by Ireland, calling for international agreement in this field, was endorsed by all the members of the United Nations at the sixteenth session of the general assembly, just a few months ago. What is required now is early action to bring this recommendation into force.
The sixth example: The United States program and the Soviet draft treaty both call for reductions of conventional arms in the first stage. The Soviet plan provides for reductions proportionate to manpower cuts. At our second meeting, the representative of the United States put forward new proposals calling for a reduction by 30 per cent. My delegation believes that this development brings the views of the two major military powers closer together. Detailed negotiations should begin at once to remove remaining differences.
My seventh example is as follows: In the crucial field of nuclear disarmament the positions of the two sides have likewise been brought substantially closer by the significant new United States proposals for a 30 per cent reduction of nuclear weapons delivery vehicles in the first stage. The Soviet draft treaty calls for the complete elimination of all such vehicles in the opening stage. Nevertheless, having in mind the magnitude of the initial cuts proposed by the United States, as well as the agreed principle of balance, my delegation believes that detailed negotiation should bring the two major military powers to agreement on phased reductions in this field.
In these seven areas, and there are probably others, we believe that an appreciable measure of common ground already exists. There is a second category of problems in which there remain more pronounced and generally well known differences between the two sides. I shall not dwell on them today, with the exception of the vital issue of stopping nuclear weapons tests, which requires special mention.
Canada deeply regretted that the Soviet union last August broke a three year moratorium on testing, for we are opposed to all nuclear weapon tests. In this we share the view of most other countries. Indeed, the major nuclear powers themselves have stated at this very conference that they would like to see all tests stopped. However, they now find themselves unable to reach final accord owing to disagreement on inspection. Is there no alternative to another series of tests with all the harmful consequences that such action
could bring? Is it not possible, within the framework of this committee, to make the further effort which is required to break the deadlock? In my opinion, such an effort must be made, for otherwise the prospects of this conference itself could be seriously threatened. We already see, in dispatch after dispatch, stories that this disarmament conference is doomed to failure. These stories are based on the talks on nuclear weapon tests which have taken place between the nuclear powers and in which the other representatives at this conference have not been involved at all. In the minds of the public the impression has been created, because of the disagreement in these nuclear test talks, that this conference is going to be a failure. This, I submit, is a very bad situation, and one which I hope will be clarified by the correspondents of all our countries. As a start, it would be most helpful to receive a report on these informal talks which have been taking place on this subject from the three participants. Countries which do not possess nuclear weapons cannot put a stop to these tests; however, we can and do appeal to the nuclear states to do everything in their power to see that a solution is not further delayed.
There is a third category of problems in which the extent and the nature of the disagreement between the two sides are far from clear. As representatives will have noticed, I referred earlier to cases where there is disagreement but where that disagreement is clear cut and everyone understands what it is. What is required to resolve this third category of differences is, in the first instance, an intensive discussion which will demonstrate precisely what the positions of the two sides are. We must find out exactly the position taken by the two sides. To avoid continued misunderstanding, the respective interests of the two sides should be brought into the light of day and the possibility of an accommodation of views examined in good faith.
One of the most fundamental problems requiring this kind of examination is the question of verification. Canada's willingness to contribute to a verified system of disarmament has been demonstrated by the offer which my government has made, and which still stands, to throw open its northern areas for inspection in exchange for comparable rights in corresponding areas of Soviet territory.
In the opinion of my delegation, the best way to achieve a realistic solution of the problem of verification is to avoid any further discussion in the abstract. We should avoid abstract debates on the word "verification". Instead, there should be careful examination of each measure of disarmament together with the specific verification procedures to

ensure that all states carry out that particular disarmament measure. In other words, let us take a measure of disarmament and with it study the verification needed for that measure, rather than studying verification in general.
Let us take an example from the Soviet draft treaty to illustrate my point. Article 5 provides for the elimination of certain means of delivering nuclear weapons and for the cessation of the production. Paragraph 3 of this article provides that the implementation of these measures should be verified by inspectors of the international disarmament organization. The language of the Soviet draft treaty suggests that substantial inspection would be allowed over this measure of disarmament. What we need to clarify is how much the inspectors are to be allowed to see, and the conditions under which they would carry out this work. Having done that, the committee would then be able to judge how adequate the inspection arrangements would be for verifying the execution of this particular measure.
In pursuing an examination of the problem of inspection, particularly in the area of disarmament which I have just mentioned, the application of sampling techniques as suggested by the United States representative should facilitate agreement. This approach ought to go a long way toward removing fears that inspection will be out of balance with disarmament or be used for any illegitimate purpose. We sincerely believe there is great hope of reaching an agreement on the question of verification through some type of sampling procedure.
The same method of careful, painstaking examination, rather than abstract debate, should be applied in other areas where important but ill defined differences appear to exist between the two sides.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I should like to make some proposals concerning procedure. Ever since the breakdown of the ten nation committee nearly two years ago, Canada has been convinced that rapid progress in disarmament negotiations would require a more efficient procedure than has been adopted in the past. In particular, we believe that agreement on effective procedural arrangements is a matter of the first importance if a committee of this size, with 17 or 18 nations participating, is to operate effectively.
The immediate question is how to proceed from the present exchange of general views on disarmament to a detailed examination of the specific problems. In the opinion of my delegation, an effective working procedure would be as follows. First, an informal committee of the whole conference should be
established on a continuing basis, with the number attending from each delegation being more limited than at plenary meetings. Second, the co-chairmen should be given the responsibility for presiding over this committee on alternate days. They should maintain close consultation with one another on the order of business. I think the plan we are following in plenary meetings of having rotating chairmen is very good,-although I know from personal experience that it is more or less an honorary position and puts one in the category of being king for a day. But we believe that for the informal committee it would be much wiser to have the co-chairmen in the chair on alternate days. Third, the emphasis in the committee should be on an informal and private method of work. There need be no list of speakers and no verbatim records should be kept. A summary record could be provided for the information of delegations.
The main purpose of this informal working committee would be threefold: first, to follow up as a matter of priority the common elements in the two plans, such as the seven points which I mentioned earlier; second, to try to achieve reasonable compromises in remaining areas where clear differences between the two sides persist; and third, to make more precise the points under dispute in areas where differences between the two sides are yet ill defined.
In suggesting this procedure, my delegation has had in mind the experience of the conference here in Geneva on the future of Laos. Although there are continuing difficulties in the field in the unhappy country, the work of the conference here in Geneva has been successful. This has been due in large measure to the fact that an effective procedure was adopted, a procedure similar to the one I am now suggesting for the disarmament conference. At our meeting on Friday, the representative of India, Mr. Krishna Menon, also referred to the experience of the Laos conference-of course, India, like Canada, is participating in that conference-and he asked in this context that the committee meet informally so that the representatives of the United States and the Soviet union might provide clarification of respective ideas. We support this idea and agree with this proposal, but what we have in mind in addition is to use the proposed informal committee not only for the purpose of seeking information, but more importantly as a continuing forum for negotiation. By inviting the guidance of the co-chairmen we recognize that the United States and the Soviet union have by far the greatest responsibility in the field of disarmament. I do not suppose that either one of these
[Stage Direction]
great nations ever sought this position of prominence or leadership in the world, but they are both in that position and they are essentially the two which must agree. It is essential that they work closely together to reach an accommodation of views.
In conclusion, while the problems of disarmament are difficult, there is clearly evident in this committee a will to achieve results
and, more important, a realization of the sobering responsibility we bear for the survival of civilization. The consequences of failure are too disastrous to contemplate. I am confident that we will justify the faith and the trust which mankind has placed in us. From all over the world today, the eyes and the thoughts of people are focused on this conference.
[Stage Direction]
Friday, March 23, 1962