1962-11-07

Mr. Leon Crestohl (Cartier) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-74, to amend the Immigration Act (Canadian's parents).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Leon David Crestohl: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to facilitate the immigration to Canada of parents of Canadian citizens regardless of their age and their country of origin.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



CANADIAN CITIZENSHIP ACT


Leon David Crestohl: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-75, to amend the Canadian Citizenship Act (age qualification).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Leon David Crestohl: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to reduce the age qualification for Canadian citizenship from 21 years to 18 years.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



WESTERN CANADA VETERINARY COLLEGE


Mr. J. N. Ormislon (Melville) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-76, to found and constitute the western Canada veterinary college.


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


James Norris Ormiston: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is simply to make it possible to provide facilities in western Canada for the study of veterinary surgery and veterinary medicine such as are now available in Quebec and Ontario.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. Cameron (High Park): What is the disposition of moneys payable by the government to persons confined to a hospital for the chronically ill who are in receipt of (a) old age security (b) old age assistance (c) blind persons allowances under the Blind Persons Act (d) disabled persons allowances under the Disabled Persons Act; and what is the reason for the difference in the disposition of the moneys?


Mrs. Casselman:: (a) Pensions under the Old Age Security Act are payable as of right to persons 70 years of age and over who fulfil the requirements of the act and the regulations made under it. There is no means test attached to these pensions. The administration of the Old Age Security Act is a federal responsibility. Pensions are payable to pensioners in chronic hospitals and the pensioners are free to dispose of their pensions as with any other asset. The exception is where a pensioner is declared to be incapable of managing his own affairs in which case the director of old age security appoints a trustee to administer the pension on behalf of the pensioner, (b) Old age assistance, blind persons allowances and (c) disabled persons allowances are paid and administered; (d) by provincial authorities under the authority of provincial acts. In accordance with the terms of agreements made by the government of Canada with the provinces under the authority of the Old Age Assistance Act, the Blind Persons Act and the Disabled Persons Act, the provinces may claim reimbursement by the government of Canada of 50 per cent of their expenditure for old age assistance and disabled persons allowances and 75 per cent of their expenditure for blind persons allowances.
The decision as to the payment of old age assistance, blind persons allowance or disabled persons allowance to a person in a chronic hospital or to any other person is a provincial responsibility. However in order for a province to obtain the federal share its decisions authorizing the payment of assistance or allowances must be in accordance with the terms of the agreements referred to above.
Any difference between payments to pensioners under the Old Age Security Act and

Questions
to recipients of old age assistance, blind persons allowances or disabled persons allowances in chronic hospitals, or any difference between benefits paid by a particular province under the three programs it administers to persons in chronic hospitals, would be explained partly by the fact that income is not a factor in determining the eligibility of an applicant for old age security and partly by specific provisions in federal legislation dealing with institutions and provincial policy decisions.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION
Mr. Orlikow: 1.	How many employees of the unemployment insurance commission were hired through the medium of the civil service commission during 1960, 1961, and the first half of 1962?
2.	How many of those persons employed were members of trade unions?
3.	How many of the employees of the unemployment insurance commission were promoted through the medium of civil service competitions?
4.	How many employees had their positions reclassified in 1960, 1961, and the first half of 1962 without competitions being held by the civil service commission?
5.	How many of those who were reclassified were still members of their respective trade unions?
6.	How many of those who were promoted held membership in their trade unions?
7.	Did the civil service commission, the Minister of Labour, the unemployment insurance commission, or any officers thereof, issue instructions to prevent the engaging or promotion of individuals holding membership in trade unions or with trade union background?
8.	Is there now any policy in effect to hire individuals with commercial and business background, rather than those with trade union background?
9.	Are there any directions in effect now which would prejudice the employment of trade union members by the unemployment insurance commission?


Mr. Hales:: 1. The number of unemployment insurance commission employees hired through the civil service commission is as follows: 1960, 1,090; 1961, 1,430; first half of 1962, 727.
2.	There is no way of determining the number of persons who were members of trade unions as employees are not asked for this information.
3.	The following unemployment insurance commission employees were promoted through the medium of civil service competitions: 1960, 600; 1961, 864; first half of 1962, 553.
4.	The number of unemployment insurance commission employees who had their positions reclassified without competitions being held by the civil service commission is as follows: 1960, 3,565; 1961, 422; first half of 1962, 230.
It should be noted that in 1960 the unemployment insurance commission was engaged

in a general program of salary and classification adjustment and the bulk of the reclassifications in that year were due to this particular program.
5 and 6. This information is not requested from employees.
7, 8 and 9. No.


MONT JOLI, QUE., AIRPORT REPAIRS
Mr. Legare: 1.	What amount ot money does the Department of Transport intend to spend in the year 1962-63 for maintenance, repairs, and improvements to the airport at Mont Joli?
2.	What amount is intended for improvements only?
3.	How many workers will be employed during the year?


Mr. McBain:: 1. $156,214.
2.	$37,500.
3.	17, plus employees of contractors carrying out the improvements.


WORK OF R.C.M.P. UNDER PROVINCIAL CONTRACTS
Mr. Matheson: 1.	In the provinces, where the R.C.M.P. is under provincial contract, how does the work divide as between federal, provincial, and municipal duties?
2.	Is the man strength provided under the provincial contract sufficient to take care of the work that the contract imposes in the cases of Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia?
3.	Is any formula currently in operation to ensure an approximately equal work load per member of the force in the aforementioned contract provinces?


Mr. Bell (Saint John-Albert):: 1. In the
provinces where the R.C.M. police is under contract a stipulated number of men are employed under the terms of the contract to carry out provincial duties, and likewise an agreed upon number of men are employed under each municipal contract to perform duties within the confines of the municipal area. In addition, the R.C.M. police maintain in each province a number of men who are considered adequate to carry out federal duties.
2.	The man strength provided under the provincial contracts is under constant review with the provincial authorities and under normal conditions is sufficient to take care of the work load. There have been occasions where-due to unusual circumstances developing-as, for example, Doukhobor depredations in British Columbia-it has been necessary to reinforce the divisions during the period of such emergency.
3.	The R.C.M. police operates under a manpower establishment. One of the primary purposes of this system is to provide for the

proper distribution of the strength of the force in each province to take care of the work load in any particular area.


MONT JOLI, QUE.  AIRPORT EXPENDITURES
Mr. Legare: 1.	What amounts did the Department of Transport expend for wages, maintenance, repairs and improvements to the Mont Joli airport during each of the following years: 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62?
2.	What are the names of those who were permanently employed at this airport during the said years?


James Alexander McBain: 1. 1959-60, $236,916; 1960-61, $195,136; 1961-62, $166,521.
2. The following air services employees have been permanently employed at the Mont Joli airport for the fiscal years 1959-60, 1960-61, 1961-62 and are still employed at this location: Albert Thibeault, Andre Cote, Clodomir Belisle, Omer Deschesnes, Joseph Cassista, Raoul Talbot, Leonard Emond, Joseph Levesque, Guy Ross, Yvanhoe Philippe, Francois Roussel, Charles Asselin, Fidele Har-ton, Leopold Fortin, Charles Thibault, John Arsenault.


DEFENCE PRODUCTION CONTRACTS, SEPTEMBER, 1962
Mr. Stewart: 1. What was the total number and total value of contracts awarded by the Department of Defence
Questions
Production during the period September 1 to September 15, 1962?
2.	What percentage of the total value of unclassified defence contracts awarded in this period was awarded to firms in the province of Nova Scotia?
3.	What are the names and addresses of the recipients of such contracts awarded in Nova Scotia and, in each case, what was the amount of the contract?


Mr. O'Hurley:: 1. 3,654 contracts having a total value of $16,863,006.
2.	3.3 per cent. It should be noted that the value of defence contracts placed directly in any one province does not reflect the impact of defence procurement in that province as it does not take into account the extent of subcontracting inherent in defence production and makes no allowance for the source of raw materials involved. In the case of certain contracts placed with head offices in Montreal, Toronto or Ottawa, the work is carried out in company plants located in other provinces. It should also be noted that the proportion of contracts placed in any province in a half month period may not be representative of the proportion placed in the province if considered over a longer period of time.
3.	See attached list.
Contractors in Nova Scotia receiving unclassified defence contracts from the Department of Defence Production during the period September 1-15, 1962
	Number of	Value of
	unclassified	unclassified
Name and address of contractor Acadia Motor Equipment Ltd.,	contracts	contracts $130 Market St., Halifax, N.S	
The Anchor Packing Co. Ltd.,	1	72.8431 Lady Hammond Road, Halifax, N.S	
Angel Mfg. and Supply Co.,	2	307.36P.O. Box 1060, North Sydney, N.S	
Armstrong Cork Canada Ltd.,	1	897.00P.O. Box 1435, Halifax North, Halifax, N.S. . . Arvan Electronics Canada Ltd.,	1	63.0049 Agricola St., Halifax, N.S	
Atlantic Oxygen Ltd.,	5	507.741250 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
Austen Bros. Ltd.,	2	99.21118 Hollis St., Halifax, N.S	
Automatic Electric Sales (Canada) Ltd.,	32	7,710.4825 Granville St., Halifax, N.S	
R. S. Babcock Ltd.,	1	82.50P.O. Box 830, Wolfville, N.S	
G. E. Barbour Co. Ltd.,	1	19.891331 Brenton St., Halifax, N.S	
R. A. Benjamin Ltd.,	4	4,643.9019 Portland St., Dartmouth, N.S	
27507-3-87	1	649.001360	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Questions
	Number of	Value of
	unclassified	unclassified
Name and address of contractor Berwick Bakery Ltd.,	contracts	contracts $Berwick, N.S	
Ted B. Blackburn Ltd.,	1	300.00Lower Sackville, Halifax, N.S	
Blackwood Hodge Atlantic Ltd.,	2	363.90453 Kempt Road, Halifax, N.S	
The British American Oil Co. Ltd.,	2	817.691521 Dresden Row, Halifax, N.S	
T. P. Calkin Ltd.,	1	32.96Box 500, Kentville, N.S	
The Camera Shop of the Maritimes,	1	35.2426 Blowers St., Halifax, N.S	
Canada Creosoting Co. Ltd.,	3	372.65Riverside Ave., Truro, N.S	
Canada Foods Ltd.,	1	154.00Pickle Division, Kentville, N.S	
Canada Packers Ltd.,	1	3,066.50957 Mitchell St., Halifax, N.S	
Canada Starch Co. Ltd.,	3	40,171.0016 Canal St., Dartmouth, N.S	
Canada Wire & Cable Co. Ltd.,	1	2,280.00353 Bayers Road-Suite 19, Halifax, N.S. .. Canadian Admiral Corp. Ltd.,	1	189.9478 Prescott St., Halifax, N.S	
The Canadian Fairbanks Morse Co. Ltd., Rudel Industrial Division, 1248 Barrington St.,	1	66.00Halifax, N.S	
Canadian General Electric Co. Ltd., Lamp Department., 3707 Howe Ave.,	29	5,142.48Halifax, N.S	
Canadian Ice Machine Co. Ltd.,	5	848.1799 Lady Hammond Road, Halifax, N.S	
Canadian Liquid Air Co. Ltd.,	2	652.25330 Agricola St., Halifax, N.S	
Canadian Marconi Co.,	4	163.58572-574 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
Canadian Pittsburgh Industries Ltd.,	1	165.5015 Bedford Row, Halifax, N.S	
Canadian Westinghouse Co. Ltd.,	2	56.90197 Kempt Road, Halifax, N.S	
Cape Breton Battery & Vulcanizing Co. Ltd.,	4	358.90416 George St., Sydney, N.S	
Chappells Ltd.,	1	383.28Brookland St., Sydney, N.S	
C. S. Charlton,	1	364.00Sand & Gravel, Bear River, N.S	
Cleveland Industries Ltd.,	1	1,865.00266 Oxford St., Halifax, N.S	
Cody's Ltd.,	1	74.501532 Birmingham St., Halifax, N.S	
Cole Motors Ltd.,	2	542.00117 Columbus St., Halifax, N.S	
Wm. Collings & Sons Ltd.,	1	28.00P.O. Box 1634, Halifax, N.S	
Colonial Agencies & Distributors Ltd.,	9	3,709.87158-160 Granville St., Halifax, N.S	
Ralph Connor Co. Ltd.,	4	343.4315 Poplar Grove, Halifax, N.S	3	6,443.80
Questions
	Number of	Value of
	unclassified	unclassified
Name and address of contractor Consolidated Supply Co. Ltd.,	contracts	contracts $86 Hollis St., Halifax, N.S	
Construction Equipment Co. Ltd.,	5	938.32135 Lower Water St., Halifax, N.S	
Cooke Sales Ltd.,	1	1,040.0010 Prince St., Halifax, N.S	
Crane Supply,	1	543.355431 Doyle St., Halifax, N.S	
Dominion Molasses Co. Ltd.,	7	408.69P.O. Box 127, Dartmouth, N.S	
Domtar Packaging Ltd.,	1	636.00180 Kempt Road, Halifax, N.S	
Douglas Hardware Ltd.,	1	99.6377 Victoria St., Amherst, N.S	
Drummond McCall & Co. Ltd.,	2	349.0049 Commission St., Halifax, N.S	
Dustbane Products, G.F. Shortt Ltd., Lessee-	3	676.75Dealer, 147 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
EMI Cossor Electronics Ltd.,	1	91.00P.O. Box 525, Dartmouth, N.S	
Eastern Builders Suppliers Ltd.,	1	3,971.95P.O. Box 1210, Halifax, N.S	
The T. Eaton Co. Maritimes Ltd.,	1	275.50Halifax, N.S	
Elm Avenue Dairy Ltd.,	1	609.95P.O. Box 130, Elmsdale, Hants Co., N.S. .. Elmsdale Lumber Co. Ltd.,	3	6,620.00282 Quinpool Rd., Halifax, N.S	
The Fairey Aviation Co. of Canada Ltd.,	2	501.00P.O. Box 69, Dartmouth, N.S	
Foster Wheeler Ltd.,	2	107,815.532005 Kline St., Halifax, N.S	
Foulis Engineering Sales Ltd.,	1	502.83P.O. Box 1530, Halifax, N.S	
Gabriel Aero-Marine Instruments Ltd.,	1	127.37126 Hollis St., Halifax, N.S	
Gabriels Restaurant,	2	63.90New Minas, N.S	
B. F. Goodrich Canada Ltd.,	1	840.00574 Main St., Moncton, N.B	
J. W. Gorham & Co. Ltd.,	1	46.50195 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
Guardian Maintenance Co. Ltd.,	1	5,913.25205 Portland St., Dartmouth, N.S	
Guilfords Ltd.,	4	947.4877 Cunard St., Halifax, N.S	
Halifax Ignition Ltd.,	8	6,158.166245 Quinpool Road, Halifax, N.S	
Halifax Shipyards Division of Dominion Steel & Coal Corporation Ltd.,	3	341.25Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
Halifax Wholesalers Ltd.,	1	1,000.00493 Chebucto Road, Halifax, N.S	
William C. Hall,	9	13,278.42Deep Brook, Annapolis Co., N.S	
G. J. Hamilton & Sons Ltd.,	1	640.00Pictou, N.S	
27507-3-874	1	129.00
Questions

	Number of	Value of
	unclassified	unclassified
Name and address of contractor Harbour Accessories & Supplies Ltd.,	contracts	contracts $164 Portland St., Dartmouth, N.S	
G. A. Hardie & Co. Ltd.,	3	258.055 Fen wood Road, Armdale, N.S	
Allister Harlow,	1	165.00Sable River West, Shelburne Co., N.S	
Harris & Roome Ltd.,	1	172.5052 Upper Water St., Halifax, N.S	
G. R. Hefler Ltd.,	3	588.85Bedford, R.R. No. 2, N.S	
H. J. Heinz Co. of Canada Ltd.,	1	300.001535 Dresden Row, Halifax, N.S	
T. Hogan & Co. Ltd.,	2	11,015.00121 Lower Water St., Halifax, N.S	
Honeywell Controls Ltd.,	3	2,820.45755 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
Howard's Ltd.,	1	600.00605 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
The Hughes Owens Co. Ltd.,	1	32.00165-169 Hollis St., Halifax, N.S	
Imperial Oil Ltd.,	1	89.30250 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
Industrial Engineering Co. Ltd.,	3	1,118.67Mackintosh & Bayne Sts., Halifax, N.S	
Industrial Suppliers Ltd.,	1	127.59P.O. Box 602, Dartmouth, N.S	
International Paints (Canada) Ltd.,	3	810.90193 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
Kellogg Company of Canada Ltd., Room No. 203, 5413 Spring Garden Road,	2	246.76Halifax, N.S	
Kelvin Hughes Division, S. Smith & Sons (Canada) Ltd.,	1	720.0021 Upper Water St., Halifax, N.S	
John A. Kennedy Co. Ltd.,	2	209.30125 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
James F. Lahey Ltd.,	1	2,785.0068 Octerloney St., Dartmouth, N.S	
Fred A. Lallemand & Co. Ltd.,	1	5,777.00150 Kaye St., Halifax, N.S	
John Leckie Ltd.,	1	96.00613 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
Leith's Services Ltd.,	2	66.86273 Townsend St., Sydney, N.S	
Liquid Carbonic Canadian Corp. Ltd.,	1	690.00Commercial & Park Ave., Dartmouth, N.S. .. Maple Leaf Dairy Ltd.,	1	8.0046 Chebucto Road, Halifax, N.S	
Maritime Accessories Ltd.,	1	120.00447 Chebucto Road, Halifax, N.S	
Maritime Floor Covering Ltd.,	3	285.96155 Kempt Road, Halifax, N.S	
Marven's Ltd.,	3	172.25Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
McKenzie's Sales Ltd.,	1	1,794.75250 Oxford St., Halifax, N.S	
J. L. McNamara (Carpets),	1	4,831.1244 Granville St., Halifax, N.S	1	329.67NOVEMBER	7, 1962	QuestionsNumber of	Value ofunclassified	unclassifiedName and address of contractor	contracts	contractsMicmac Agencies Ltd.,	$861 McLean St., Halifax, N.S	
Mine Safety Appliances Co. of Canada Ltd.,	4	171.12150 Charlotte St., Sydney, N.S	
W. & A. Moir Ltd.,	2	37.81694 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	
Moore Business Forms Ltd.,	21	2,804.20269 Gottingen St., Halifax, N.S	
C. P. Moore Ltd.,	1	20.86335 George St., Sydney, N.S	
H. K. Morrison & Sons Ltd.,	2	910.30Mount Uniacke, Hants Co., N.S	
Mosher Brokerage Co. Ltd.,	1	3,496.50P.O. Box 625, Halifax, N.S	
J. & M. Murphy Ltd.,	2	2,908.00Howe Ave., Halifax, N.S	
National Dalex (1961) Ltd.,	1	108.345 Fenwood Road, Armdale, N.S	
North Sydney Marine Rly. Co. Ltd.,	1	108.00Box 400, North Sydney, N.S. . ..	1	36.49Northern Electric Co. Ltd.,	3609 Howe Ave., Halifax, N.S	10	1,646.05Nova Scotia Armature Works Ltd.,	2453 James St., Halifax, N.S	
Nova Scotia Tractors & Equipment Ltd.,	1	87.66235 Kempt Road, Halifax, N.S	
O'Malleys Ltd.,	3	331.16P.O. Box 538, Dartmouth, N.S	
Powers Regulator Co. of Canada Ltd.,	2	8,679.40171 Windsor St., Halifax, N.S	2	165.79Purdy Bros. Ltd.,	67 Upper Water St., Halifax, N.S. . .	1	2,152.00Puritan Sales Ltd.,	P.O. Box 123, Halifax, N.S	2	2,296.31L. J. Quigley Ltd.,	136 Spring Garden Road, Halifax, N.S. .	4	789.97R.C.A. Victor Co. Ltd.,	49 Commission St., Halifax, N.S	3	2,997.53Railway & Power Engineering Corp. Ltd.,	210 Archimedes St., New Glasgow, N.S. .	3	398.80Rayner Construction Ltd., Folly Lake, N.S	Reeves Building Supplies Ltd., Box 196, Welton St., Sydney, N.S	262.50Reid Sweet Photo Supplies, 6 Blowers St., Halifax, N.S	1	897.00Richmond Paper Co.,	114.36180 Kempt Road, Halifax, N.S	1	151.20Robb Engineering Works Ltd.,	P.O. Box 490, Amherst, N.S	1	11.60Joseph Robb & Co. Ltd.,	31 Lady Hammond Road, Halifax, N.S	3	607.95Wm. Robertson & Son Ltd.,	205 Lower Water St., Halifax, N.S	2	152.14Safety Supply Co.,	861 McLean St., Halifax, N.S	
W. H. Schwartz & Sons Ltd.,	3	1,449.65826 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S	2	1,697.201364	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Questions
	Number of	Value of
	unclassified	unclassified
Name and address of contractor Scotia Equipment Ltd.,	contracts	contracts $65 Brunswick St., Halifax, N.S	
Scotia Flour & Feed Co. Ltd.,	1	144.301 George St., Halifax, N.S	
Scotia Instrument Co. Ltd.,	3	3,476.492 Prince St., Halifax, N.S	
Sellotape Canada Ltd.,	1	88.00P.O. Box 1642, Halifax, N.S	
Shelburne Co-operative Ltd.,	1	13.32Shelburne, N. S	
The Sherwin-Williams Co. of Canada Ltd.,	1	1,680.00213 Gottingen St., Halifax, N.S	
James Simmonds Ltd.,	1	13.9243 Upper Water St., Halifax, N.S	
Snap-on Tools of Canada, Ltd.,	1	32.40P.O. Box 303, Dartmouth, N.S	
Sperry Gyroscope Co. of Canada Ltd.,	2	825.952 Prince St., Halifax, N.S	
Wm. Stairs, Son & Morrow Ltd.,	1	765.00174 Lower Water St., Halifax, N.S	
Standard Brands Ltd.,	13	3,479.56234 Lady Hammond Road, Halifax, N.S	
Standard Construction Co. Ltd.,	2	1,615.08101 Upper Water St., Halifax, N.S	
Steel & Engine Products Ltd.,	1	9,498.005455 Cogswell St., Halifax, N.S	
J. W. Stephens Ltd.,	9	1,557.34189 Townsend St., Sydney, N.S	
E. S. Stephenson & Co. Ltd.,	1	516.002639 Robie St., Halifax, N.S	
Swift Canadian Co. Ltd.,	7	966.2811 North St., Halifax, N.S	
M. L. Thomas,	1	60.00Berwick, N.S	
Thompson & Sutherland Ltd.,	1	525.00303 Charlotte St., Sydney, N.S	
Tibbetts Paints Ltd.,	1	370.26Trenton, N.S	
E. S. Tracey Mfg. Co.,	4	465.757 Woodill St., Halifax, N.S	
Trane Company of Canada Ltd.,	1	755.20236 Roy Bldg., Halifax, N.S	
Twin City Sand & Gravel Ltd.,	1	198.03P.O. Box 821, Halifax, N.S	
Union Electric Supply Co. Ltd.,	1	165.00200 Gottingen St., Halifax, N.S	
Webb Engineering Ltd.,	2	482.53P.O. Box 1141, Halifax, N.S	
W. N. White & Co. Ltd.,	1	3,433.50184 Granville St., Halifax, N.S	
The Willett Fruit Company Ltd.,	1	89.80P.O. Box 665, Dartmouth, N.S	
Russell Williams,	3	2,614.93468 Main St., Liverpool, N.S	
Wilson Equipment Ltd.,	2	114.0046 Elm St., Truro, N.S	2	73.75
Number of unclassified
Name and address of contractor	contracts
G. H. Wood & Co. Ltd.,
168 Lady Hammond Road, Halifax, N.S		2
Woodlawn Dairy Ltd.,
Canal St., Dartmouth, N.S	 1
Questions
Value of unclassified contracts $
380.70
7,850.00
Total
352,580.25


T.C.A. CONTRACTS WITH CANADAIR LTD.
Mr. Rouleau: Has Trans-Canada Air Lines awarded contracts to Canadair Ltd., of St. Laurent, Quebec, since July 1, 1957, and, if so, how many, what was the nature of each contract, and what was the amount of each such contract?


James Alexander McBain: The management of Trans-Canada Air Lines advise as follows: It is not customary to provide information with respect to individual contracts entered into between Trans-Canada Air Lines and any of its suppliers, as this could be used to advantage by competitive agencies.


VANGUARD AIRCRAFT USED BY T.C.A.
Mr. Badanai: 1.	How many aircraft known as "Vanguards" are operated by T.C.A.?
2.	Have these aircraft proved satisfactory?
3.	Have any of these been taken off service and, if so, for what reason?
4.	What was the cost of each?


James Alexander McBain: The management of Trans-Canada Air Lines advise as follows:
1. 22.
2.	Yes.
3.	See answer to No. 2.
4.	The approximate average cost per aircraft, including federal sales tax, was $2,900,000.


REPRESENTATIONS BY MR. CLEMENT BROWN
Mr. Rouleau: 1.	Has the government received during the last year, written representations from Mr. Clement Brown, candidate in the constituency of Dollard at the last federal election and parliamentary correspondent for a Montreal newspaper, asking for (a) the elimination of the noise caused by jets on experimental flights at Canadair, and (b) regulations governing night air traffic at Dorval airport?
2.	During the same year, has Mr. Brown made written representations to the government with respect to aircraft sales promotion by the Canadair Company Limited of St. Laurent, Quebec?


Mr. Halpenny:: 1. No.
2.	No.


C.N.R. STATION, FORT WILLIAM
Mr. Badanai: Is it the intention of the Canadian National Railways to abandon the station at Fort William and to replace it with a shelter at Victoria avenue and, if so (a) does this mean that Fort William will no longer be listed as a station stop and (b) will ticket facilities be available at the so-called shelter?


James Alexander McBain: The management of Canadian Railways advise as follows:
The board of transport commissioners authorized abandonment of the station at Fort William to be replaced by a passenger shelter. (a) Fort William will continue to be listed as the station stop, (b) No. Tickets of course are available for purchase on the train.


SPANISH BANKS AIR PARK, VANCOUVER
Mr. Davis: Has the Department of Transport given its approval of the Spanish banks air park at Vancouver and, if so, will the department be issuing an aerodrome licence for this project?


James Alexander McBain: The Department of Transport in answer to an inquiry has stated that it has not found any technical objection, i.e. on grounds of safety, to the proposed Spanish banks air park. However, the department has not given any specific approval to this project or undertaken to provide any assistance to it, nor has any application been received for any licence in this connection.


*NEW ARMOURIES CONSTRUCTION
Mr. Ryan: 1.	Does the government plan to tie in the construction of new armouries with civil defence?
2.	Has the government any plans to construct new armouries underground?


Mr. Harkness:: 1. The construction of new armouries is not tied in with civil defence as such. New armouries are constructed to meet the needs of the Canadian army (militia).
2.	There are no plans at present to construct new armouries underground. However, the use of basements of all armouries is being considered by the army and the emergency measures organization in the light of their roles in survival operations, because of the inherent protection factor in these structures.

Questions


STORAGE OF BUTTER AND BUTTER OIL
Mr. Pennell: 1.	Has the government entered into any contracts with corporations and/or individuals for the storage of butter and/or butter oil and, if so, were tenders called for the purpose of negotiating such contracts?
2.	What are the names of the corporations and individuals with whom the government executed such contracts?
3.	What payments have or are being made under such contracts?


Mr. Jorgenson:: 1. No contracts have been entered into for the storage of butter, but since May, 1961 the agricultural stabilization board has called tenders for the storage of butter oil.
2.	Storage and Location
Barrington Food Locker Reg'd., Orms-town, Que.; Co-operative Agricole de Granby, Granby, Que.; Conserverie St-Denis Ltee., St-Denis sur Richelieu, Que.; Cremerie Belanger Inc., Quebec, Que.; Dominion Fruit & Fish Ltd., Quebec, Que.; Empire Cold Storage, Montreal, Que.; Entrepot Frigorifique Champlain Ltee., Quebec, Que.; Entrepot Frigorifique Limoilou, Quebec, Que.; Entrepot Frigorifique Charlesbourg, Quebec, Que.; Granby Locker Co. Ltd., Granby, Que.; Lansdowne Storage Ltd., Sherbrooke, Que.; Les Produits Laitiers Mont St-Hilaire Ltee., St. Hyacinthe, Que.; La Cremerie de Weedon Ltee., Weedon, Que.; Lawrenceville Cold Storage, Lawrence-ville, Que.; Metropolitan Cold Storage, Granby, Que.; Quebec Freezers Ltd., Quebec, Que.; Shefford Dairy Ltd., Lawrenceville, Que.; Vermette & Fils Ltee.; St. Agapit, Que.
Brockville Co-operative Assn., Brockville, Ont.; Great Lakes Cold Storage, St. Thomas, Ont.; Glen Roy Creamery & Cold Storage, Belleville, Ont.; Intercontinental Warehouses Ltd., Toronto, Ont.; Interprovincial Freezers Ltd., Chatham, Ont.; J. D. Moore Co. Ltd., St. Mary's, Ont.; Norwood Creamery Cold Storage, Norwood, Ont.; Owen Sound Cold Storage Ltd., Owen Sound, Ont.; Oxford Farmers Co-operative, Woodstock, Ont.; Producers Cold Storage Ltd., Windsor, Ont.; Puritan Dairy Products Ltd., Dunnville, Ont.; W. E. Snow Ltd., Toronto, Ont.; Stacey Bros. Ltd., Mitchell, Ont.; Stormont Cold Storage Co-operative, Cornwall, Ont.; Whyte Packing Co. Ltd., Mitchell, Ont.
Crescent Cold Storage Ltd., Winnipeg, Man.; Federal Cold Storage Co. Ltd., Winnipeg, Man.; Inland Cold Storage Ltd., Winnipeg, Man.; Manitoba Cold Storage Co. Ltd., Winnipeg, Man.; Morden Cold Storage Ltd., Morden, Man.; Western Processing & Cold Storage Ltd., Portage la Prairie, Man.; Winnipeg Cold Storage Co. Ltd., Winnipeg, Man.
Central Cold Storage Co. Ltd., Prince Albert, Sask.; Modern Cold Storage, Saskatoon,

Sask.; Regina Cold Storage, Regina, Sask.; Trans Canada Freezers Ltd., Regina, Sask.
Edmonton Cold Storage, Edmonton, Alta.; Railhead Cold Storage, Edmonton, Alta.; Southside Cold Storage and Distributing Co., Edmonton, Alta.; Trans Canada Freezers Ltd., Edmonton, Alta.
3.	Payments for the storage of butter oil range from 7 cents to 13 cents per 54 pound box per month for the first eight months' storage, with a reduction of 3 cents per box per month for subsequent months as specified under conditions of tender.


MOUNT APICA, QUE., RADAR STATION
Mr. Lessard (Lake St.: John):
1.	What was the original construction cost of the radar station at Mount Aplca in the Laurentians?
2.	What is the cost of all the improvements added thereto, including staff residences and services?
3.	What is the total annual operating cost of such a station?
4.	How many people, military and civilian, comprise the staff?
5.	What is the total amount paid by way of salaries for the entire staff?


Douglas Scott Harkness: 1. $10 million.
2.	$3 million.
3.	$2 million.
4.	69 civilians and 321 service personnel.
5.	$1.5 million per year.
Note:-Financial figures are approximate.


ALMA, QUE., AIRPORT AND LANDING STRIP
Mr. Lessard (Lake Si.: John):
What has been to date the total amount paid by the government for the construction of the Alma (Lake St. John) airport and its landing strip?


James Alexander McBain: The total amount paid by the government for the construction of the Alma (Lake St. John) airport and its landing strip is $406,292.


* COASTING TRADE RESTRICTION, GREAT LAKES
Mr. Chevrier: 1.	On what date did the Minister of Transport announce that the coasting trade in Canada was to be restricted to Canadian registered vessels from Les Escoumains upstream to the head of the lakes?
2.	Is the government aware that certain ships not of Canadian registry are loading and unloading cargo in the restricted area for transit from one Canadian port to another Canadian port, in competition with Canadian registered ships?
3.	If so, was it the intention of the government to prohibit this kind of traffic on the St. Lawrence west from Les Escoumains to the head of the lakes?


James Alexander McBain: 1. May 12, 1961.
2 and 3. Yes. Implementation of the government's decision, however, required consultation with the other countries of the

commonwealth and subsequent legislative action for implementation, as explained in the announcement on May 12, 1961. Legislation to give effect to this decision will, it is expected, be available for consideration at the present session.


CAMPBELLTON AND EDMUNDSTON, N.B.   GRANTS BY C.N.R.
Mr. Dube: Is the Canadian National Railway Company paying any taxes or grants in lieu of taxes to the cities of Campbellton and Edmundston, New Brunswick, and, if so, what assessment is used and what were the amounts given each city in 1961?


James Alexander McBain: The management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
The company pays grants in lieu of taxes to the cities of Campbellton and Edmundston. The payment to the city of Campbellton in 1961 was $3,468.90 and was based on an assessment of $163,972. The payment to the city of Edmundston for the year 1961 was $7,486 and was based on an assessment of $292,570.


RESTIGOUCHE AND MADAWASKA COUNTIES, N.B.- PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
Mr. Dube: Are construction works being carried out at the present time by the Department of Public Works in the counties of Restigouche and Madawaska, New Brunswick, and, if so, what is the location of each project and the amount of money that has been voted for such works?


Mr. McCleave:: Yes; detachment quarters for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are under construction at Jacquet River at a contract cost of $38,895.


RESTIGOUCHE COUNTY, N.B.    FISHERMEN'S WHARVES
Mr. Dube: 1.	What have been, since 1957, the expenditures of the government for the construction and/or maintenance of fishermen's wharves in the parishes of Colborne and Durham in the county of Restigouche, New Brunswick?
2.	What amount of money has been expended, and when and where was it expended?


Robert Jardine McCleave: 1. The sum of $7,514 for dredging a mooring and berthing area inside the pierhead at Culligan (Jacquet river).
2. Answered by No. 1.


SECOND TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY, NEW BRUNSWICK
Mr. Dube: Is the government considering the construction of a second section of the trans-Canada highway linking the northern part of New Brunswick to the present highway along the American border and, if so (a) how many miles would compromise the second section and (b) when is the construction likely to start?
Questions


Robert Jardine McCleave: The question of a second trans-Canada highway is a matter of government policy and any decision that may be made on it would be brought before the house is the usual manner.



*MONTREAL


Mr. Asselin: Has the Department of Justice through the R.C.M.P. conducted an investigation into an alleged swindle involving the Home Improvement Act in the Montreal area and, if so, have any prosecutions been recommended?


Thomas Miller Bell: The answer to this question is that investigation is proceeding in this matter.



STUDY OF WATER DIVERSION FROM COLUMBIA TO FRASER RIVERS

Mr. Davis: 1.	Was a competent consulting firm engaged to investigate the economic and engineering problems involved in diverting water from the Columbia river into the Fraser river basin and, if so, what was the cost of this study?
2.	Have the results of this study been made available to members of parliament?


Mr. Dinsdale:: 1. Yes; $241,000.
2. No.



* FREIGHT RATES REDUCTION ACT PAYMENTS

Mr. Lewis: 1.	Which railways received payments under the Freight Rates Reduction Act for each of the years 1959, 1960 and 1961?
2.	How much was each such railway paid for each of the said years?
3.	What was the method of allocation of funds?


James Alexander McBain: Mr. Speaker, both this question and the next one stand in the name of the same hon. member. The answers to these questions are quite lengthy and contain a large number of figures. I would ask permission to have both answers appear in Hansard without being read.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed to have the answers appear as though read?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


James Alexander McBain: The Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada advise as follows:
1.	The companies which received payments under the Freight Rates Reduction Act for the year 1959 were; Canadian National Railways, Canadian Pacific Railway Company, Algoma Central and Hudson Bay Railway, Midland Railway of Manitoba, Northern Alberta Railways, Ontario Northland Railway, Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway, Great Northern Railway, New York Central System,

Questions
Chesapeake and Ohio Railway, Wabash Railroad Company, Canada and Gulf Terminal Railway, Napierville Junction Railway, Canada Steamship Lines.
These same companies, with the exception of the Wabash Railroad Company, also received payments for each of the years 1960 and 1961.
2.	The amounts to the nearest dollar paid to each company for each of the years 1959, 1960 and 1961 were:
Canadian National Railways, $4,264,300; $10,735,839; and $10,731,106.
Canadian Pacific Railway Company, $2,802,708; $7,925,067; and $7,916,758.
Algoma Central and Hudson Bay Railway, $45,141; $104,059; and $103,380.
Midland Railway of Manitoba, $3,763; $20,743; and $21,457.
Northern Alberta Railways, $88,941; $264,895; and $234,740.
Ontario Northland Railway, $172; $374; and $156.
Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway, $17,886; $54,019; and $51,453.
Great Northern Railway, $1,488; $6,383; and $3,951.
New York Central System, $11,399; $37,643; and $43,155.
Chesapeake and Ohio Railway, $15,367; $26,493; and $44,405.
Wabash Railroad Company, $24.
Canada and Gulf Terminal Railway, $2,546; $8,731; and $10,511.
Napierville Junction Railway, $906; $2,907; and $3,580.
Canada Steamship Lines, $45,786; $95,039; and $131,486.
3.	The board ordered the companies to reduce rates as required under the Freight Rates Reduction Act so that in the opinion of the board the estimated aggregate gross revenues of the companies on freight traffic would be reduced by $20,000,000 in one year or $15,000,000 in nine months. Each of the companies was required to file with the board, as soon as possible after the end of each calendar month, a statement in duplicate, certified by its accounting department, of the diminution in its gross revenue resulting from an order made by the board under the act, in such detail as the board, from time to time, required.



* INTERIM PAYMENTS TO RAILWAYS

Mr. Lewis: 1.	Which railways received interim payments related to recommendations ol the royal commission on railway problems in respect of the calendar year 1961?
2.	How much was each such railway paid, in what instalments, and on which dates?
3.	What was the method of allocation of funds?


James Alexander McBain: The Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada advise as follows:
1.	Payments were made to companies as defined in the Freight Rates Reduction Act which received payments in respect of traffic carried under such act during the year 1961, namely: Canadian National Railways, Canadian Pacific Railway Company, Algoma Central and Hudson Bay Railway, Midland Railway of Manitoba, Northern Alberta Railways, Ontario Northland Railway, Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway, Great Northern Railway, New York Central System, Chesapeake and Ohio Railway, Canada and Gulf Terminal Railway, Napierville Junction Railway, Canada Steamship Lines.
2.	The amount received by each company was: Canadian National Railways, $29,015,610; Canadian Pacific Railway Company, $19,343,740; Algoma Central and Hudson Bay Railway, $267,320; Midland Railway of Manitoba, $55,483; Northern Alberta Railways, $606,993; Ontario Northland Railway, $404; Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway, $133,046; Great Northern Railway, $10,215; New York Central System, $111,590; Chesapeake and Ohio Railway, $79,166; Canada and Gulf Terminal Railway, $27,178; Napierville Junction Railway, $9,258; Canada Steamship Lines, $339,997.
Payments were made monthly beginning in August 1961, with final payments in April 1962.
3.	The method of allocation of funds was set out in board orders as follows: "The allocation to each company of an amount that bears approximately the same relation to the total amount payable to all companies under the said appropriation acts as the amount payable to the company under the Freight Rates Reduction Act in respect of freight traffic carried during the year 1961 bears to the total amount payable under that act to all companies in respect of that traffic":
with the further proviso
"After deducting from the said $50,000,000 the amount payable therefrom to companies other than Canadian National Railways and Canadian Pacific Railway Company, in accordance with the said orders of the board, the remainder shall be aRocated 60 per cent to Canadian National Railways and 40 per cent to Canadian Pacific Railway Company".



NUCLEAR WEAPONS FOR U.S. AIRCRAFT IN CANADA

Mr. Drury: During the recent Cuban crisis, did the United States government or one of its agencies seek permission to (a) move into Canada, United States manned interceptor aircraft (b) move nuclear weapons into Canada (c) arm with nuclear weapons

United States aircraft already stationed at United States bases in Canada; and, if so, was Canadian permission withheld in any case?


Douglas Scott Harkness: It is recognized that communications exchanged between the Canadian government or its agencies and the United States government or its agencies relating to national security are treated on a confidential basis.



NORAD ALERT DURING CUBAN CRISIS

Mr. Drury: 1.	During the recent Cuban crisis, did NORAD order a full alert and, if so, when?
2.	When were those actions, which were to be taken on alert by the R.C.A.F. and which required the approval of the Canadian government, authorized by the government?


Douglas Scott Harkness: 1. No, but the continental air defence command of the United States was placed on an increased state of readiness following the President's statement.
2. The precautionary measures-which were taken on an ascending scale-referred to by the Minister of National Defence on October 24 included the authorization of an increased state of readiness for R.C.A.F. air defence command.



CANADIAN RECIPIENTS OF VICTORIA CROSS

Mr. Dumont: What are the names and last known addresses of all Canadian recipients of the Victoria Cross since it was established in 1856?
(Translation):
He said: Mr. Speaker, may I add French Canadians only, since an answer was given for the English Canadian recipients of this award. It would simplify the answer.


Mr. Speaker:: If the house does not object, the question could be amended as the hon. member indicates. Is it agreed?
Question stands as amended.
(Text):



CONFERENCE ON CANADIAN FLAG

Mr. Cameron (High Park): 1.	Has the government extended an invitation to the ten Canadian provinces to a conference for consultation regarding choice of a national flag and other national symbols?
2.	Has a date been set or suggested for such conference?
3.	What replies have been received, and what is the nature of such replies?


George Ernest Halpenny: 1. No.
2 and 3 are therefore not applicable.
Questions



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS TO CANADIANS IN U.S.

Mr. Cook: Has a date been fixed for a meeting between unemployment insurance commission officers and representatives from the state of Maine concerning benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act of Canadians employed in Maine and, if not, what steps are being taken- to arrange such a meeting?


Alfred Dryden Hales: No. The chief commissioner of the unemployment insurance commission has been corresponding with the chairman of the Maine insurance commission on this subject and it is expected that a date for such a meeting will be determined in the near future.



RICHMOND-WOLFE CONSTITUENCY, QUE.   FEDERAL PROJECTS

Mr. Bernier: 1.	What works projects are provided for by the Department of Public Works during the current financial year in the constituency of Richmond-Wolfe?
2.	Where will they be undertaken?
3.	What are the amounts involved in each case?


Robert Jardine McCleave: 1, 2 and 3. Location, Project and Amount.
Asbestos: Courtyard facilities at post office building. Contract awarded July, 1962. Completed November, 1962. $12,160.
Weedon: Construction of post office building. Contract awarded January, 1962. Completed August, 1962. $15,228.
Windsor: Construction of public building. Contract awarded April, 1962. In progress. $42,800.



LAVIOLETTE COUNTY, QUE.  PAYMENT FOR STREET PAVING AND SEWERS

Mr. Laprise: 1.	Has the Paquin Construction Company Ltd., of Val d'Or been paid for the street paving and sewer work executed on the Principale and St-Andre streets of the municipality of Parent, county of Laviolette, and, if so, what amount was paid to the said company for such work?
2.	Has the municipality of Parent made any contribution to the cost of such work and, if so, on what date?


Douglas Scott Harkness: 1. The Paquin Construction Company of Val d'Or, P.Q., has been paid the sum of $42,792.90 in respect of road improvement works including paving on the main street of the village of Parent, P.Q., from the bridge over the Menjobaguse river to the post office.
2. No.



EXPORTS-IMPORTS-PERCENTAGE OF GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT

Mr. Laing: In each year since 1950, what percentage did goods (a) imported into Canada (b) exported from Canada, bear to annual gross national product?
Questions


Mr. Nesbitt:: (a)	(b)
1950 	... 17.4	17.41951	... 19.4	18.71952 	... 16.0	18.11953 	... 16.8	16.61954 	... 15.7	15.81955 	. .. 16.7	16.01956 	... 18.2	15.81957 	... 17.2	15.31958 	... 15.4	14.91959 	... 16.0	14.81960 	. .. 15.4	15.01961	... 15.5	16.0DIVISION	OF ARMY COSTS	
Question No. 622-	-Mr. Maiheson:	
What proportion	of army costs are	attributed
to (a) payment allowance for service and civilian personnel and (b) equipment, in each of the years commencing 1955?


Douglas Scott Harkness: (a) Pay and	(b)
	Allowances	Equipment
Fiscal Year	Per cent	Per cent1955-56 ...	... 45.2	14.21956-57 ...	... 49.7	11.11957-58 ...	.. . 58.6	6.11958-59 ...	.. . 57.5	9.21959-60 ...	. . . 61.9	6.01960-61 ....	. . . 63.9	6.71961-62 ...	.. . 64.9	6.21962-63 	
(Estimated)	.. . 63.9	6.1



* QUEBEC-GRANTS FROM GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Mr. Rinfrel: 1.	In 1961, what universities and other institu tions of learning in the province of Quebec receivet grants from the geological survey of Canada?
2.	What amounts were granted?
3.	For 1962, what universities or institutions o
learning m the province of Quebec have appliec for such grants?	^
(Translation):


Mr. Martineau:: 

GOVERNMENT GROUP MEDICAL-SURGICAL PLAN

Mr. Barnett: 1. Does the government operate a group surgical-medical plan for its employees?

2.	What classes or groups of employees are entitled to coverage under this plan?
3.	For how many weeks or months is an individual required to be in the employ of the government in any one year to qualify as a participant under this plan?


Mr. Grafftey:: 1. Yes.
2.	Subject to the answer to part 3, any person employed by the government of Canada, except a person who is an employee locally engaged outside Canada, is eligible to apply for insurance under this plan.
3.	There is no waiting period before an employee described in part 2 is eligible to apply to join the plan if he is (a) employed on a year round basis in a continuing position for an indeterminate period, or (b) employed for a term or season of more than six months' duration, or for a session of parliament.
Any other employee is eligible to apply to join the plan after he has been continuously employed in the public service for at least six months.



BUTTER OIL

Mr. Laing: 1.	To date, how much butter has been converted to butter oil?
2.	What total sum has been paid to creameries for the conversion?
3.	Has any butter oil been sold as such?
4.	Have any negotiations taken place with India on the prospective sale of butter oil and, if so, what has prevented finalization?


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: 1. 104,975,430 pounds of butter have been converted to butter oil.
2.	$2,234,313.51
3.	Yes.
4.	No.



* WHEAT


Mr. Rapp: Has a decision been made by the Canadian wheat board in regard to final payments for the 1961-62 wheat deliveries and, if so, (a) what will be the size of this pool (b) what will the final payment be for the different grades per bushel (c) when will these payments be forthcoming?


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: No decision has been made by the Canadian wheat board in regard to final payments for the 1961-62 wheat deliveries.



VANCOUVER-PURCHASE OF PROPERTY FOR ARMOURY

Mr. Laing: 1.	Was some property purchased in the constituency of Vancouver South for an armoury and, if so, what was (a) location (b) acreage (c) name of agent acting for the crown (d) name of vendor (e) total price paid?
2.	Has a decision since been taken not to proceed and, if so, why?
3.	Has any disposition been made of the property?


Douglas Scott Harkness: 1. No.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.



* CONFORMITY OF LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS WITH BILL OF RIGHTS

[Stage Direction]
>
Mr. Pennell: Does the government intend to amend section 3 of the Canadian Bill of Rights so that the house will be informed whether any amendment to a bill after its introduction conforms to or is inconsistent with the Canadian Bill of Rights?


Thomas Miller Bell: This relates to a matter of government policy and any announcement in connection therewith will be made in the usual manner.



WINTER WORKS PROGRAM, NOVA SCOTIA

Mr. Maclnnis: 1.	What municipalities in the province of Nova Scotia participated in the winter works program of 1961-62?
2.	Is the municipal winter works program carried out in all ten provinces of Canada on the same basis and, if not, what are the differences?
3.	Are the funds available for municipal works allocated provincially before the applications are actually received from the municipalities?
4.	What applications have been received from municipalities in Nova Scotia to participate in the winter works program for 1962-63?
5.	What applications have been approved to date?
6.	Are any applications from municipalities handled without receiving prior approval of the provincial government concerned?


Alfred Dryden Hales: 

QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Badanai: Of the total of 127,086 immigrants receiving government aid between 1951 and March 31, 1962, what was the breakdown by year, the form of assistance, and the country of origin of each?


Mr. McGee:: Return tabled.


* LANGUAGE QUALIFICATIONS, CIVIL SERVICE COMPETITIONS
Mr. Rinfrel: 1.	How many women and men have declared that they could speak, read and write English only, and French only, at competitions or examinations held by the civil service commission for appointments made during 1961, to fill the following positions (a) 16 in the public archives (b) 17 in the insurance department (c) 23 in the auditor general's office (d) 6 in the national library (e) 6 in the board of broadcast governors (f) 14 in the House of Commons (g) 13 in the board of transport commissioners (h) 13 in the national gallery of Canada, and (i) 11 in the national energy board?
2.	Among those who were appointed following the above-mentioned competitions or examinations, how many women and men declared that they could speak, read and write both English and French?
3.	For the appointments above mentioned, what were the various positions offered in each department?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 33-Mr. Haidasz:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all communications addressed to the food and drug directorate and to the Department of National Health and Welfare from the special committee on drugs established by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons at the request of the minister.
Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the said motion?


Mr. Diefenbaker:: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the minister is not present possibly this could stand.


Jean Casselman Wadds: Speaking on behalf of the minister, Mr. Speaker, as the special committee on drugs mentioned in this motion has not completed its study or prepared its report, it seems premature to place this motion before the house. I believe the mover has had a

discussion on this with the Minister of National Health and Welfare and is prepared to withdraw the motion.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the hon. member prepared to withdraw the motion?


Mr. Haidasz:: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



LETTER OF RESIGNATION OF RICHARD B. SIMMINS

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 35-Miss LaMarsh:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of the letter of resignation submitted by Richard B. Simmins, director of exhibition extension services.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 37-Mr. Cadieux (Terrebonne):
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all reports and other documents in the possession of the Department of National Health and Welfare relating to the selection of Banff, Alberta, instead of Mont Tremblant, Quebec, as the proposed site of the 1968 winter Olympic games.
Jean Casselman Wadds: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of National Health and Welfare I am prepared to accept this motion, subject to the usual reservations that communications within our department and with other federal departments fall within a class that must be regarded as privileged.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservations mentioned by the parliamentary secretary, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the said motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Mr. Speaker:: Before we come to orders of the day I wish to mention that the other day, I believe it was Friday, when the Minister of Transport indicated that he wished to table an order in council, I inadvertently said that the house would give its unanimous consent. That is a little too extensive. It is usually done by leave of the house, and I wish to thank

the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) for drawing this to my attention.



COLUMBIA RIVER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Arthur Laing (Vancouver South):: should like to address a question to the Prime Minister. Can he give us now some indication when we may expect submission to the house of the Columbia river treaty and the attendant legislation, indicated by the word "soon" in the speech from the throne?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I can say this. When we complete the legislative program that is before the house, and if the hon. gentleman will secure the co-operation of those around him in order to do this, then we will be in a position to advance.



INQUIRY AS TO SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON DEFENCE POLICY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Prime Minister whether he has yet been able to give consideration to the suggestion that a special committee of this house on defence policy should be set up. If so, what is the result of that consideration?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, as soon as the government is in a position to place before the house its views in connection with this matter, it will be done.



AIR TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Donald S. Macdonald (Rosedale):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Does the minister have any statement to make on the subject of a national aviation policy, in view of the remarks of the chairman of the air transport board as to the urgent necessity for such a policy, as reported in this morning's Globe and Mailt


Hon. Leon Balcer (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, this morning I saw the chairman of the air transport board and he assures me that a wrong interpretation was given to his remarks, and that in no way at all did he intend any criticism of the government's air policy.
Inquiries of the Ministry
To set the matter straight, I must say that as far as the prairie air services are concerned the recommendations of the board, following their review of the western regional air services, were handed down to me on Wednesday last. These recommendations are the subject of an intensive study by the government, and a final decision will be announced very shortly.
As far as the two large carriers, T.C.A. and C.P.A., are concerned, the policy of the government on this matter is reviewed by the government from time to time, and there are no changes of policy intended in the near future. I have stated in the past that our two large air lines should co-operate as much as possible and investigate continually new fields of co-operation, in the interest of the air tines themselves, the travelling public and the taxpayers of this country.


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Bonavista-Twillingate):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister be good enough to table, for the information of hon. members, the text of the speech made by the chairman of the air transport board?


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, I do not even know that there is a text.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, let the minister find out.


Mr. Charles M. Drury (Si. Anioine-Wesi-mouni):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport arising out of his initial answer. If I understood him correctly he announced the policy with regard to the major air line, namely an exhortation to them to co-operate, and he said that it was not the intention of the government to consider or review its policy regarding major air lines.


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, as I said, from time to time the government reviews its policy and there is no intention of any change in the very near future; and I have already stated what is the policy at the present time.


Mr. D. M. Fisher (Pori Arthur):: A supplementary question in relation to the answer of the minister. Is the minister prepared to tell us whether he has in his hand a report setting out a recommended aviation policy for the government?


Léon Balcer: From time to time officials of the government prepare reports for the use of the government, and it has always been the practice of this house to consider these as privileged documents.
1374	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry



C.P.A.-APPROVAL OF FLIGHTS FROM WESTERN CANADA TO LONDON

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the minister whether, in view of his statement, he has anything to say at this time on the position of the C.P.A. route into Great Britain, the approval of which has been delayed for so long.


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, I answered a similar question from my hon. friend from Laurier earlier in the session. There is no change from the stand as it was at that time.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Just more delay.



INQUIRY AS TO FINAL PAYMENT ON 1961 CROP

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Since the information has been given to us this afternoon that the wheat board did not approach the government with reference to the final payment on wheat, can the minister say whether he is prepared to take any initiative in discussing with the wheat board the feasibility of making this payment at an early date?


Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, the wheat board's first duty is to sell wheat. I have been making very strong representations to them these last few months to the effect that this is their primary duty. I think the hon. member for Assiniboia is well aware that these pools do not close off until the spring of the succeeding year, and to ask them to close off at this time would be a little premature.


Hazen Robert Argue: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Since it was possible to close out the previous pool in a nine months period, ahead of the election, I wonder whether it might not be possible to close out the present one in nine months also and give the farmers their money.
{Translation):



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. C. Caniin (Quebec South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence.
Does the minister intend to ask the treasury board for a reconsideration of its decision of some days ago regarding the abolishing, in
IMr. Balcer.]

the suburbs of Quebec city, of the bus service available for the transport of employees between C.A.R.D.E. and Valcartier, so that these people, as of December 1 next, will have to pay over $30 a month for their transportation.
(Text):


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, I received some representations in connection with this matter from the hon. member for Quebec-Montmo-rency earlier today, and I informed him at that time that I would look into this matter and see what was the situation with regard to it.
(Translation):



CIVIL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
(Page 1374)
Mr. Azellus Denis (St. Denis):: Mr. Speaker, if I understood correctly your previous ruling, you will not rule my question out of order before I put it.
In view of the absence of the Associate Minister of National Defence (Mr. Sevigny), I should like to direct my question to the Minister of National Defence.
In view of the danger and apprehension caused by the Cuban crisis, would the government consider the advisability of entering into negotiations with Montreal authorities and of taking advantage of the fact that the construction of the subway is still in its first stage, to build along that subway at less cost, bombproof shelters for the people of the city of Montreal, which is particularly exposed to a nuclear attack?
(Text):


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, I do not think I had better undertake to build a subway in the city of Montreal.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Robert Simpson (Churchill):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Could the minister inform the house whether a study is being conducted by Canadian National Railways concerning ways and means of encouraging a greater amount of rail passenger traffic and, if so, where is this study being conducted?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I feel that this
question is in the same category as one asking whether train XYZ is being jettisoned

for the winter or otherwise. I think detailed questions with regard to railway operations should be made questions for the order paper.


John Whitney Pickersgill: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the hon. member asked a very simple question as to whether a study was being conducted in regard to increasing rail traffic. There was no detail involved, and the minister was obviously ready to reply when the point of order was raised by Your Honour.


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps I am not able to read the minister's mind as well as the hon. member, but there have been a number of similar questions directed to ministers from all parts of the house, and since they were, in the main, questions for the order paper, I can only feel that the same should apply to this question.


Robert Simpson: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. In view of the very important hearing that will take place at The Pas, Manitoba, tomorrow concerning the discontinuance of Canadian National passenger service, and in view of the fact that many of these hearings will be held in the very near future in several parts of Canada, would the minister consider the suggestion that no further applications for discontinuance of passenger service be approved until studies are forthcoming, which I believe are being conducted by Canadian National Railways-


Mr. Speaker:: Order; the hon. member has made his representation.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Thomas R. Berger (Vancouver-Burrard):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Can the minister tell the house when the forthcoming meeting of the NATO council of ministers will be held, and whether the minister will be attending the meeting?


Hon. Howard C. Green (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, the meeting will be held in Paris on December 13, 14 and 15, and I expect to be attending.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Thomas Rodney Berger: May I ask the minister a related question?


Thomas Rodney Berger: May I direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs relating to the answer he gave to my previous question. Can the minister assure the house that at the forthcoming meeting of the NATO council of ministers he will resist any proposals to arm Canadian forces in NATO with nuclear weapons?


Howard Charles Green: I suggest it would be quite improper for me to answer a question of that kind.



CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. R. Nicholson (Vancouver Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Has the contract for the construction of the overpass across the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks at Heatley avenue, Vancouver, been executed-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: -and can the minister give us any information as to when this work will begin on this important undertaking?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I earnestly submit to the hon. member that such a question is one for the order paper.
(Translation):



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Viafeur Ethier (Glengarry-Prescoti):: Mr. Speaker, my question is intended for the Postmaster General.
A survey was conducted in Hawkesbury a couple of weeks ago in order to establish when the letter carrier delivery service would start. The investigators considered that the number of mail boxes was insufficient for such service. Would the Postmaster General tell us what her department intends to do?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I am very sorry, but it seems to me that any question concerning letter carrier delivery service is not important enough to be asked on the orders of the day.
1376	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry
(Text):



CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister; I regret that there has not been opportunity to give him prior notice. Will the Right Hon. Prime Minister assure the house that he is taking steps to ensure that the Grey cup game will be televised over the C.B.C. and affiliated stations across Canada?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. A number of questions of varying quality have been asked on this subject, and as the date approaches, as a matter of urgent national interest and may I say for my own personal curiosity, perhaps the questions could be answered.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I took the applause on the other side of the house to indicate that the official opposition was in favour of this; I hope I interpreted that applause correctly. The Prime Minister has no right in any way, to suggest to the C.B.C. what they should do, but I think hon. members in this house should not be denied the right to express their belief that this event, which I think is generally recognized as a great event contributing to national unity and pride, might well be made available to Canadians in every part of Canada.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. T. Asselin (Notre Dame de Grace):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the minister of health, or in his absence to the parliamentary secretary, based on a report in the Montreal Gazette of November 5, 1962 to the effect that due to the effects of radioactive fall-out, 600 deformed babies were born in Alberta in 1961. Can the minister say whether his department is aware of the report and has undertaken an investigation?


Jean Casselman Wadds: I will take that question as notice, Mr. Speaker.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs a question based on yesterday's decision by the general assembly of the United Nations, when it was resolved that measures should be taken against South Africa. My question is, does the government of Canada, in so far as this country is concerned, intend to carry out the sanctions decided upon by a majority of the United Nations against South Africa, although it is true that Canada did not vote for the resolution?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, the United Nations general assembly has now concluded its discussion of the question of race conflict in South Africa resulting from the policies of apartheid, with which was linked the question of the treatment of people of Indian and Indo-Pakistani origin. The resolution, sponsored by 33 African and Asian members, was passed yesterday in a plenary session of the general assembly by 67 votes in favour to 16 opposed, with 23 abstentions.
The resolution deplores the failure of the South African government to comply with repeated requests and demands of the United Nations to abandon its racial policies and requests members, separately or collectively, to undertake specific diplomatic and economic sanctions against South Africa. The resolution also establishes a special committee to be nominated by the president of the assembly to keep the racial policies of South Africa under review, and invites member states to inform the next session of the assembly of actions they have taken to dissuade the government of South Africa from pursuing its apartheid policies. Finally, the resolution requests the security council to take appropriate measures, including sanctions, to secure South Africa's compliance with assembly resolutions on this subject and to consider South Africa's expulsion from the United Nations.
The hon. member for Queens, my parliamentary secretary, made it clear in his statement on this subject before the special committee of the assembly that Canada condemns without any qualification the South African government's harsh and repressive policy of apartheid. The Canadian delegation, while strongly supporting the aims of the resolution, voted against it as a whole because of our grave doubts about the appropriateness of the use of sanctions by the United Nations in a situation which does not involve external aggression or a question of peace or war. We are also opposed to the expulsion

of South Africa from the United Nations because of the principle involved and because the United Nations has more opportunity to exert its influence with South Africa in the organization.
No opportunity was given to vote clause by clause because a resolution was put through by a very small majority providing that the only vote could be on the resolution as a whole. Canada, for example, would have voted in favour of the clause calling for the setting up of a committee.
With regard to action Canada will take, may I say this. The hon. member will notice that the resolution requests the security council to take the next step. Until any such further step is taken it would be premature for me to make any statement on the Canadian position.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have a supplementary question. In view of the action taken by the Prime Minister of Canada at the second last conference of prime ministers which led to the expulsion of South Africa from the commonwealth, does the minister not think he owes to the house and the country a more precise and comprehensive explanation for not voting for this resolution at the United Nations?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. While the question may be related, I think the hon. member was making an argument in support of a proposition, and that it was hardly a supplementary question.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think I had the floor first, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: A question of privilege overrides all.


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, only if it is raised before a point of order is raised.


John George Diefenbaker: I rise on a question of privilege in order to say to the hon. gentleman that the statement he made that my action resulted in the expulsion of South Africa is false in every respect. It has no foundation whatsoever. After discussion, South Africa decided that under all the circumstances it was going to withdraw from the commonwealth.
Inquiries of the Ministry LABOUR CONDITIONS



SUGGESTED FORUM TO RESOLVE LABOUR-MANAGEMENT DIFFERENCES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. E. Gray (Essex West):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Will the government follow the suggestion of Mr. George De Young, chairman of the national productivity council, made in Windsor on Saturday last and calling for a national forum in the near future to attempt to resolve differences between the views of labour and management?


Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I confer with Mr. De Young, very often indeed, and have great respect for his opinions and suggestions. As I have pointed out to this house, the government has already called several conferences of labour and management. Those conferences have been extremely productive and, as a result of those conferences, I believe that labour-management co-operation is becoming more of a reality in Canada every day.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is not what Mr. Jodoin says.


Herbert Eser (Herb) Gray: I have a supplementary question.


Mr. Speaker:: I trust that the supplementary question will not be in the nature of setting up a statement by some hon. gentleman.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I allowed the question to go through. However, having reflected on both the question and the answer, may I say that it is not the practice under oral questions to set up the statement of an individual and ask a minister to comment or get into a controversy over that statement. If the hon. member has a supplementary question I will hear it.


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Essex East: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not wish to add to your difficulties-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Paul Joseph James Martin: -however, I think this is a moment when we might seriously question the course Your Honour is now taking. On other occasions Your Honour sought to deal with supplementary questions by saying that there was a distinction between a supplementary question and a related question. It is clear that in the last few weeks Your Honour has not referred to this distinction. Your Honour has not said recently that there was a difference between a related question and a supplementary question, perhaps, for the simple reason that nowhere in

Inquiries of the Ministry our rules or in our standing orders is there to be found any reference to any such thing as a related question. It seems to me that to preclude a member from putting what he calls a supplementary question before he has put that question at all invites great concern on the part of hon. members, who regard the question period as a fundamental right of the opposition.


Mr. Speaker:: As I have indicated to the hon. member for Essex East, I have no intention of throttling the opposition-the hon. member has not used that word-or, shall we say, hindering the opposition from asking questions. However, I would point out to him that while in the standing orders there is no such thing as a distinction between a supplementary question and a related question, 1 think he will appreciate the fact that all hon. members in this house have an equal right to ask questions. I put it to him that it is sometimes the practice that an hon. member will keep unto himself the privilege of asking questions by saying "I have a supplementary question", when in fact the supplementary question should go to clarify some latent ambiguity or other simple point in a reply. I am not averse to recognizing an hon. member at any time in order that he may put what might be considered to be a related question. However, my concern here is to give all hon. members equal privileges in the matter of asking questions.


Herbert Eser (Herb) Gray: I rise on a question of privilege.


Mr. Speaker:: In so far as the hon. member for Essex West is concerned, may I say this. There was no question of stopping him from asking a supplementary question. All I was indicating was a word of caution that in the supplementary question we were not going to continue an argument or a potential argument about something that Mr. De Young or someone else had said and upon which the minister was being asked to comment. If the hon. member has a supplementary question I will hear it. I was prepared to do so when I was interrupted.


Herbert Eser (Herb) Gray: Mr. Speaker, first on my question of privilege I should like to say that there appeared to me to be-and I say this with the utmost of respect-a suggestion in your last remark that I had in the past been taking up the time of the house unnecessarily, and I have not yet asked my supplementary question.


Mr. Fleming (Eglinton):: Is the hon. member going to act like a child like the hon. member for Essex East?


Mr, Speaker:: If the hon. member has a supplementary question, will he please ask it?


Herbert Eser (Herb) Gray: My supplementary question
which is directed to the Minister of Trade and Commerce is this, in view of the answer he gave to my last question; whether he or his government will take steps to correct what Mr. De Young has called a mistake in the original organization of the national productivity council by remedying the lack of adequate labour representation?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The question was in the nature of what I suspected.


Mr. R. J. Teillel (St. Boniface):: Mr. Speaker, I must rise on a question of privilege.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: All right; watch it.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I think the hon. member should know that one does not threaten across the floor. Any remarks should be addressed to the Chair. If the hon. member is raising a question of privilege, and he may feel he has a question of privilege, I will hear him; but let us hear him.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: When I mentioned a question of privilege I meant privilege of all members of this house. Your Honour suggested that you had called my colleague out of order because you suspected the nature of his question. When you called the question out of order you repeated that statement. I believe that was unfair and, with all respect to Your Honour, I believe that statement should be withdrawn.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I trust that the hon. member is not suggesting that the Chair is not being impartial with respect to the hon. member for Essex West, or that the Chair should withdraw any remarks. I think on reflection the hon. member will find that this is not in the traditions of this house. I will give him the opportunity of explaining his words and indicating to the Chair that he is definitely not suggesting that the Chair is being unfair.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: Only because I wish to assist you, Mr. Speaker, may I call Your Honour's attention to page 60 of Beauchesne, fourth edition, paragraph 6 of citation No. 70, which reads as follows; I will wait until Your Honour gets the paragraph:
The Speaker decides questions of order only when they actually arise and not in anticipation. He is bound to call attention immediately to an irregularity in debate or procedure and not wait for the interposition of a member.
We understand the difficulty under which Your Honour is operating, but the first sentence is a clear indication that Your Honour is not acting in accord with this

citation, when you anticipate a question, as was obviously done in the case of the question put by the hon. member for Essex West.


Hon. E. D. Fulton (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that this discussion is not based upon a proper appreciation of the fundamental rule or situation regarding the asking of questions at this stage of our proceedings. Your Honour made it clear that the observation you made was based upon Your Honour's interpretation of the previous question that had been asked, and Your Honour was suggesting that that question having been out of order, in your opinion it should not be followed by a similar question similarly out of order.
It does seem to me that it would be helpful to the hon. member for Essex East particularly if he would recall the opening words of citation 173 of Beauchesne, fourth edition, on page 149, which reads as follows:
On the orders of the day being called, members may ask members of the government to explain certain matters in accordance with practice, but it is not done under the authority of a standing order and therefore such questions may be either permitted or disallowed by the Speaker who must judge each case on its merits.


Some hon. Members:: Go on.


Mr. Caron:: Read further.


Mr. Fulion:: By all means. Perhaps we had better have the whole citation on the record in the context of this discussion.
The practice has been so long and so regularly in the house that, if not impossible, in my opinion, it would be inadvisable to stop it.
What is being done is an attempt to keep the hon. member for Essex East within the bounds of order. This citation is based on a ruling or observation of Mr. Speaker Glen, and it continues:
It seems to me manifestly unfair to compel ministers to answer questions on important matters without an opportunity to consult their chief officers; and it would be arbitrary to deprive private members of putting certain questions of immediate urgency on the orders of the day being called. The principle on which the practice has been tolerated in past years should be respected, that is, the reading of long series of questions elaborately prepared is not to be allowed on the orders of the day being called. Honourable members must confine themselves to the questions they desire to put; they must not enter into an argument upon asking a question; they cannot add any remarks upon it; a question, the answer to which involves an expression of opinion, cannot be put. A member in putting a question cannot state an opinion, and he must confine his observations to those which are absolutely necessary to make the question intelligible.
It should be remembered that the basic principle which has long been observed in this house, until attempts to over-ride it such as we have just seen by the hon. member for Essex East and others, is that on the
Inquiries of the Ministry orders of the day being called members may ask members of the government to explain certain matters in accordance with practice, but that is not done under the authority of a standing order, and therefore such questions may be either permitted or disallowed by the Speaker who must judge each case on its merits.


Mr. Robichaud:: Not before they are asked.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that when the Speaker gives his decision whether a question is in order or out of order no point of order in fact arises, because Your Honour by the practice is the sole judge of whether or not questions, written or oral, are in order and whether or not they conform to the rules and practices of the house. What we are witnessing here, Mr. Speaker, is an attempt to raise an argument on your decision under the guise of a point of order, and to extend the practice so that what is done or may be done under the precedent so established with respect to asking questions would bear no resemblance to the proper practice or procedure whatsoever.


Alexis Pierre Caron: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, in citation 173 it is stated:
-therefore such questions may be either permitted or disallowed by the Speaker who must judge each case on its merits.
To be able to judge a case on its merits I think Your Honour has to listen to the question before it can be judged.


Mr. Jones:: It was a supplementary to an improper question.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. If hon. members will cast their minds back to the sequence of events, I would point out that the hon. member for Essex West asked a question and there was a reply by the minister. The hon. member then asked whether he could ask a supplementary question and there were some events that intervened. I then informed him that I would hear his supplementary but I indicated that I felt his previous question had been of the nature of asking the minister to comment on the statement of Mr. De Young, and I indicated that the supplementary should not be of that nature. I then invited the hon. member to state his supplementary question. He did so, and I found that the question as he asked it was of a nature to invite the minister to comment on a statement again by Mr. De Young, which would lead to controversy. That is what I indicated, and I feel that I was not anticipating a point of order at all.
With regard to the matter that the hon. member for St. Boniface has raised, I realize

Inquiries of the Ministry that he is a new member of the house but I would draw his attention to citation 72, paragraphs 1 and 3, of Beauchesne, and I will leave it at that.



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jack Davis (Coast-Capilano):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Has the United States made an official request to Canada to set a deadline for the removal of the government's special tariff surcharges?


Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minister of Finance):: Discussions are going on, under GATT, as I said earlier, and at the moment there has been no deadline set. Discussions are still going on.


John (Jack) Davis: I should like to ask a supplementary question. Has support for Canada's application for exemption from the rules of the general agreement on tariffs and trade been conditional upon the United States receiving some assurance of this kind from Canada?


George Clyde Nowlan: Canada is asking for no exemption from the general rules affecting trade.
(Translation):



LOANS MADE IN U.S. BY CANADIAN BANKS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapointe):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put to the Minister of Finance a question of which I gave him notice.
Does the minister have information to give us in relation to the fact that since the austerity program was put into effect Canadian chartered banks have lent substantial amounts of money on the American market, especially on the New York market, thus bringing credit restrictions in Canada?


Azellus Denis: You were not even in the house to vote last night.
(Text):


George Clyde Nowlan: Mr. Speaker, I have no detailed knowledge of the business affairs of the banks. I think this is probably a proper question for the order paper. However, since it has been asked I will check into the matter and hope I can obtain the information in order to reply later.



ROYAL COMMISSION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. J. Benson (Kingston):: I should like to address a question to the Minister of Finance similar to the question I addressed last Thursday. In view of the fact that part of Mr. Towers' in camera evidence before the royal commission on banking and finance has been made public, will the minister assure the house that all of Mr. Towers' evidence and Mr. Coyne's evidence will be made public?
Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minister of
Finance): The short answer is no. The government has no control over the powers of the commission. The commission is its own master. As I gathered from reading the press clippings to which the hon. member directed my attention, what was released was a brief submitted by the former governor, Mr. Towers, to the royal commission; but his evidence was not released in any way. (Translation):


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I wish to put a supplementary question to the Minister of Finance.
If I have understood the answer correctly, it must be admitted that this commission on banking was set up by the federal government. And I wonder whether I understood the minister correctly as stating that the reports of the testimony of Messrs. Coyne and Towers would not be made available to the members of parliament.
(Text):


George Clyde Nowlan: I can only say again that the commission is master of its own proceedings. The government does not purport to exercise direction and control in respect of the administrative detail of the commission. (Translation):


Gilles Grégoire: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. After all the royal commission on banking was set up by the federal government and its expenses are paid out of public funds. Therefore, I should like to know from the Minister of Finance why he cannot exert any control over that commission.


Mr. Speaker:: If we proceed along that line, we will start a long discussion.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.
Some time ago the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Thompson) asked the Prime Minister if any members of the house would be present when Messrs. Towers and Coyne would appear before the commission on banking. At that time the Prime Minister replied

that he would see about it. Consequently we relied on that, thinking that we would be allowed to attend the hearings, and today we are told that we will not even be given the minutes of the evidence after those gentlemen have been heard.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I submit that the government should see to it that we obtain the evidence given by Mr. Towers and Mr. Coyne to the royal commission on banking.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the evidence be tabled.


Mr. Speaker:: Before he can submit a motion, the hon. member must enter it on the order paper of the house after 48 hours' notice.
(Text):



INQUIRIES OF THE MINISTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. W. Martin (Timmins):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Has he received any communication relative to debt free money from the hon. member for Davenport?


Mr. C. S. Smallwood (Battle River-Cam-rose):: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker. I understand the hon. member for Charlotte (Mr. McLean) has distributed five tins of sardines throughout the house. I hope he had no repercussions from the hon. member for York-Humber, as he used the messenger service to distribute them.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. If the Chair sometimes seems to have difficulty recognizing hon. members on questions of privilege, some incidents which have occurred this afternoon make the Chair a little wary about such questions.


Thomas Rodney Berger: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. Gordon) whether it is true he has been invited by the Social Credit party to become their financial critic?


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Mr. Churchill:: Answer.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The question is very definitely out of order. No hon. member may ask another hon. member a question unless that other hon. member is in charge of a committee.


Mr. J. C. Munro (Hamilton East):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Has he communicated his appreciation to the members of the New Democratic party for sustaining his austerity program last night?
Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Perhaps the hon. member might be prepared to move a motion that we have a period known as brickbats and bouquets.



INQUIRY FOR RETURNS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. N. Turner (St. Lawrence-St. George):: I wonder whether the Minister of Finance or his parliamentary secretary would be good enough to indicate to the house when they expect to be able to table the papers which were ordered tabled by this house on October 24 in my name?


George Clyde Nowlan: I will make inquiries in connection with that matter and advise the hon. member in due course.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Malcolm Maclnnis (Cape Breton South):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. Has the minister been informed of a lay-off of employees at the R.C.A.F. station at Sydney as a result of the shortage of funds? Will he take steps to prevent this serious lay-off?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria brought this matter to my attention earlier today, and I told him I would have the matter investigated in order to find out what the situation was.



NORAD-DISCUSSIONS RESPECTING EFFICIENCY AND FIRE POWER

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Hellyer (Trinity):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. My question is not directly related to an article by Ronald Collister in the Toronto Telegram of May 6, entitled "Lame Duck May Lose Wing", but it is somewhat along that line.
During the last few days, have there been any discussions between the government of Canada and the government of the United States or between the defence departments of the two governments in respect of steps that could be taken by North American air defence command to make it more efficient and to give it more fire power in the event of another crisis?


Douglas Scott Harkness: No, Mr. Speaker.

Farm Credit Act
(Translation):



PRICES PAID BY EASTERN AND WESTERN FARMERS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Bernard Dumont (Bellechasse):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Agriculture.
Could the minister say where the 94 cents difference goes between the price paid for wheat to western farmers and the price paid to eastern farmers per 100 pounds basis Fort William?
(Text):


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, I think under the rules it would be better if that question were put on the order paper.



FARM CREDIT ACT


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, November 1, consideration in committee of Bill No. C-71, to amend the Farm Credit Act- Mr. Hamilton-Mr. Chown in the chair.
On clause 1-Capital.
Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, when we rose at ten o'clock on Thursday evening I had been answering a statement made by the Minister of Agriculture to the effect that under the policy of the government small farmers could get their required funds from banks through the provisions of the Farm Improvement Loans Act. I want to demonstrate very briefly that the small farmers, under this government, have been very seriously discriminated against in obtaining credit from the Farm Credit Corporation.
The minister was kind enough to provide me with a table of loans of various sizes provided by the Farm Credit Corporation. I do not want to burden the house with a lot of detail but this table shows that eight loans under $2,000 were provided in the year ended March 31, 1961, and in the following year ended March 31, 1962, these had been reduced to one. In the number of loans from $2,000 to $3,000 there had been a reduction of 41, from 72 to 31; loans of $3,000 to $4,000, a reduction of 62, from 176 to 114; loans of $4,000 to $5,000, a reduction of 87, from 292 to 205; loans of $5,000 to $6,000, a reduction of 69, from 391 to 322; loans of $6,000 to $7,000, a reduction of 64, from 462 to 398; loans of $7,000 to $8,000, a reduction of 49, from 503 to 454, and in loans of $8,000 to $9,000, a reduction of 14, from 470 to 456.
In the categories of loans below $9,000 there was a reduction of 405 in the total number

of loans. It is true there was an increase in the over-all number of loans by some 288, but if you take the $9,000 loan as the breaking point, then below $9,000 there were 405 fewer loans and above $9,000 there were 693 additional loans. This is very clear evidence that the Farm Credit Corporation is moving in the wrong direction, namely to choke off the number of loans to small farmers. I am not complaining about the number of larger loans provided, but when that number is increased the number of smaller loans should also be increased.
If a farmer comes in seeking a $3,000 loan the minister says "Let him use the Farm Improvement Loans Act; let him go to the banks", but the minister knows it is not possible for any farmer to get a loan from the banks, under the provisions of the Farm Improvement Loans Act, to purchase land. On the other hand 59 per cent of the money supplied by the Farm Credit Corporation has been used for land purchases; 22 per cent has gone to pay existing obligations against land and, over all, 80 per cent has been used in connection with the purchasing of new land and consolidating mortgages against land already purchased.
In other words, 80 per cent of the money provided by the Farm Credit Corporation is devoted to land purchases and the small farmers cannot get money for land purchases when they go to the banks. When they want to buy additional land they must come to the Farm Credit Corporation and that corporation is turning them down.
I suggest that the government should not continue closing the doors to small farmers seeking credit. The small farmer who can improve his position by buying additional land should be encouraged and should be provided with this kind of credit.
The expansion of the total aggregate provided for by this legislation is good. In fact it should be expanded even more and we say that the small farmer should be given a chance and that the minister should not say "Let him go to the banks" when the banks are unable, under the terms of the Farm Improvement Loans Act, to provide money for the purchase of land. We suggest there should be a much greater emphasis placed on providing money for the small farmer, and the government and the corporation should stop closing the doors in his face.


Mr. Herridge:: I want to support the hon. member for Assiniboia on this point and to compliment him for continuing to support New Democratic party policies. When he raised this matter the other day we were under the impression he was referring to credit for

the purchase of cattle, machinery or equipment, but when he says every consideration should be given to the small farmer to enable him to acquire additional land in order to make his property an economic unit, then he is quite correct and we urge the minister to give consideration to this point.


Mr. Horner (Acadia):: Mr. Chairman, just one little thought came to my mind while the hon. member for Assiniboia was speaking. He assumed-and I think he was perhaps basing his remarks on a false assumption-that all the small loans were made to small farmers. I think his original remark should be drawn to the attention of the committee, because he made this false assumption and based his whole argument on the assumption that the small loans were made to small farmers.
In fact, I think if he had perhaps studied the situation and had a great deal of knowledge of it, the exact opposite would be true; the big loans are more than likely going to the small farmer to enable him to purchase enough land to make his unit what might be termed by the experts an economic unit. This is borne out by the fact that he himself admitted that 80 per cent of the loans made, in his rough calculations, were for the purchase or the repayment of loans for land. It is only logical to assume, if 80 per cent of the loans made were for land, that they were made to those persons who perhaps require land most, and these would definitely be the small farmers.
This is perhaps where the hon. member for Assiniboia attempted, either falsely or without going into the matter thoroughly, to lead the committee on a wild goose chase with regard to small farmers. All of a sudden his big desire is to satisfy or to meet the needs of the small farmer. He has, perhaps, over the years tried to show a close affinity to small farmers, but in joining the party of which he is now a member he more or less shrugged them off and is now trying to gather them together again with this attempt to portray his interest in the small farmer. Actually he is leading the committee on a wild goose chase in suggesting that the small loans are made to small farmers. More than likely the direct opposite is true.
(Translation):


Bernard Dumont: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Thompson) has made in the house a proposal worthy of Solomon, that is to charge $10 on loans not exceeding $5,000, and $50 on loans over $5,000.
Would the Minister of Agriculture insert that proposal in the Farm Credit Act? Such 27507-3-88
Farm Credit Act
an amendment would meet with the general approval of the house, I am sure.
(Text):


Mr. Clunis:: Mr. Chairman, in connection with the proposed legislation under the Farm Credit Act, very briefly I should like to direct the attention of the minister to two aspects of the act and its administration which bring about some measure of unfairness. The first has to do with policy, and the second with administration. I think the minister is well aware that there are areas of eastern Canada, particularly in Ontario, where the lending authority of the corporation is not geared to meet local conditions. The Niagara peninsula, the counties of Norfolk, Elgin, Kent and Essex, I think provide excellent examples. Climate, topography and the fertility of the soil have combined to give this area a high value for its land. The land, in fact, is more highly valued than lands in many other parts of Canada.
Since I have a more intimate knowledge of the county of Kent, it would perhaps be more authoritative to draw on examples in that particular county. I would emphasize that I am informed the same situation exists in other areas. The cost of land in Kent, land which is improved, tiled and equipped with adequate dwelling and outbuildings, varies between $250 and $500 per acre, and the minimum acreages that are recognized as efficient farm units vary from 150 to 250, depending on the crops that are grown. The more costly lands are farmed more intensively and can operate efficiently in units of 150 acres. Lands which sell at $250 an acre are considered efficient units in 250 acre parcels. It follows, therefore, that land costs for efficient farm units vary from $60,000 to $75,000, and the cost of suitable equipment varies between $12,000 and $15,000.
I think it will readily be seen that part II loans on the land maximum are limited in effect to 30 per cent of the value of the land, and part III loans are in approximately the same relationship. The net effect of the present policy of the corporation is to lend to approximately 30 per cent of the value of land in Kent and similarly situate areas, and 60 per cent of value in the remainder of Canada. This unfairness, Mr. Chairman, is magnified even further because the size of the loans required in this particular area pretty well rule out private lenders; that source of fixed capital is not readily available. As a matter of fact, they would much prefer to invest in government bonds at the attractive interest rates. Also, corporate loans which were available in the past to farmers in that area are no longer available because of the competition which has been offered by the Farm Credit Corporation. Farmers, there-

Farm Credit Act
fore, find themselves in the position that private loans are not available, corporate loans are not readily available, and yet they are limited by this ceiling to $20,000 which, with great respect, is not adequate having regard to the figures I have indicated as to the value of the land.
Therefore I would respectfully suggest to the minister that there be an upward revision of the ceiling on these loans. I quite agree that the basis of 60 per cent of value should remain, and I think that is probably one of the reasons the percentage of losses by the corporation has been one of which we can well be proud. However, it seems to me it is most desirable that all farmers everywhere should be in the position where they are able to borrow on an equitable and rateable basis. This can only be done, having regard to the value of the lands in the areas of which I speak, if the ceilling of $20,000 and $27,500 under the two portions of the act is raised. I would respectfully suggest that this inequity should be corrected, and I believe it would be in keeping with the intention of the act at the time the scope of operations of this corporation was extended.
The second matter to which I should like to direct the minister's attention involves administration. I believe it also deserves immediate attention. I can supply to the minister particulars of a loan transaction which was needlessly delayed for six months. The loan application was made with the co-operation of the local office of the corporation; the inspection was made in the normal course, and reported promptly; the loan was approved by the corporation in good time and the legal branch at the Ontario office completed its work quickly, or reasonably quickly. There then followed six months delay before the closing of that transaction. I suggest to the minister that this is a most undesirable situation. It is most undesirable because all the employees of the corporation, as well as his own department, are subjected to criticism, unjust criticism, for conduct that is totally unnecessary. The policy of selecting local solicitors to carry out part of the functions of the corporation in local areas is not one which I am prepared to suggest should be changed. I must recognize that there are some qualified solicitors in the county of Kent who either through environmental influences or otherwise have not yet seen the light and are probably able to qualify to serve the corporation.
It would be my suggestion, Mr. Chairman, notwithstanding the fact that more recent developments have, I believe, indicated a 16-day check-up in connection with routine work through these offices, that it would be most desirable that steps be taken to appoint two

or three or more agents in local areas in order that this work might proceed quickly. Very often it transpires that this work is assigned to one office, a busy office which apparently prefers to do the normal work of private clients first, and the work of the commission receives secondary consideration.
May I close by saying that if in anything I have said I have reflected unfavourably on the commission's employees or on the routine or procedure which it follows, I should like to correct this. It has been my experience that this corporation is working efficiently and is subject to the delays which occur normally during the winter when an inspection is not possible. I believe that this work is being done effectively, and I very much regret that criticism is advanced against employees of the commission and the commission itself because of this one shortcoming.
(Translation):


Mr. Drouin:: Mr. Chairman, I should like, at the outset, to set the record straight concerning the statement made by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hamilton) on November 1, 1962, which is to be found on page 1205 of Hansard.
In his statement, the minister commented on certain facts which I had brought to the attention of the house on the 4th and the 14th of October.
I was not in the house when the minister made his statement. Had I been here, I would have replied immediately, for he brought this matter up on the resolution stage of the bill now before us. I therefore trust, Mr. Chairman, that you will allow me to set the matter straight.
The minister implied that I had misled hon. members when I said that one of his officials "had fallen in with the petty political manoeuvre of the former Conservative member" of my riding, when an application was made for a farm loan. The minister indicated that he had made an investigation before replying to my accusation. I know how the investigation was conducted, and I maintain that it does not deal fairly with the parties concerned.
Following my remarks of the 4th and the 19th of October, Mr. Beaudoin, who is responsible for the administration of the Farm Credit Corporation regulations in the province of Quebec, met, I am told, with Mr. Allard, the public servant in question, and asked him if my statements were true. Of course, Mr. Allard protested, saying that he believed that as early as April 28, he had informed the farmer that his application for a farm loan could not be accepted by the corporation. Mr. Beaudoin then submitted to

Farm Credit Act
the minister a report to that effect, and it is this report which is to be found, in substance, on page 1205 of Hansard.
In fact, Mr. Chairman, that farmer is a customer as well as a friend of mine, besides being a dedicated organizer for my party in Argenteuil-Deux-Montagnes. So as not to reduce his chances to obtain a loan from the Farm Credit Corporation, he had refrained from all active participation during the last election. Had he known, on April 28, that he would not get that loan, I am satisfied that he would have acted otherwise.
During the last week end, I met again with that farmer and we discussed this business at great length. And I maintain that he was not told before the month of September that his application had been rejected, when I informed him of the letters I had exchanged on that question with Messrs. Allard and Beaudoin.
Therefore, the minister consulted only the implied civil servant, and then he stated in this house that I had misled him. I am not asking the minister to suspend or to dismiss inspector Allard, for I know that he has worked under difficult conditions and that he could not possibly give satisfaction to everybody and to the former member for Argen-teuil-Deux-Montagnes.
However, if the minister had wanted to be fair to all parties concerned, including myself, he should have consulted with me. He would not have limited his investigation to consulting the implied civil servant, but he would have also consulted the farmer in question. If he had told me about it, I would have gladly put my information sources at his disposal.
Now, I should like to bring to the attention of the house a particularly serious situation which affects many of our farmers. The problem may perhaps be solved with the approval and especially the coming into effect of the bill now before us, more particularly if the minister keeps the kind intentions he showed in his speech at the resolution stage.
Following a question I had put on the order paper, I received some documents giving the quantity of poultry imported into Canada during the last fiscal year.
During the period from April 1 to June 30, 1961, 8,760,716 birds were imported for the whole of Canada and 3,681,969 for the sole province of Quebec-


Mr. Pigeon:: Order.
27507-3-88J
(Text):


The Chairman:: Order. I am trying to assist the hon. member to come back to the clause under consideration. I thought he was beginning to stray a little, but I am listening patiently and hoping that he will tie in his remarks, if he will, with clause 1. (Translation):


Vincent Drouin: Mr. Chairman, I respectfully submit that, under standing orders, we are allowed to deal with anything pertaining to the measure and all its provisions when discussing the first section of the bill.
Therefore, I would like to speak about the situation of poultry farmers, with regard to loans they may or may not receive from the Farm Credit Corporation, and I respectfully submit that my remarks are entirely in order.
During the following period, that is from July 1, 1961 to March 31, 1962, Canada imported 12,079,007 birds, whereas, in the sole province of Quebec there was 4,657,916 such imports, which gives a total of 20,839,733 birds for the whole of this country during the last fiscal year, and, for the province of Quebec only, 8,339,875.
Mr. Chairman, if the house would permit, and in order to avoid a fastidious reading out of figures I would have printed in Hansard a table which shows, for each of the provinces, the quantities of fowl imported for consumption during the last fiscal year. (Text):


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, unless the hon. member is prepared to show precisely, and now, what this has to do with the Farm Credit Act, I cannot give my permission to put this table on Hansard.


Mr. Ricard:: He is completely out of order.


Hazen Robert Argue: That is not very generous. (Translation):


Vincent Drouin: Mr. Chairman, I intend to establish the right of our poultry farmers to borrow from the farm credit corporation like any other group of farmers. Besides, the minister himself suggested in his speech at the resolution stage that the poultry farmers should be able to obtain loans from the Farm Credit Corporation. Therefore I respectfully submit that my remarks are in order and that the document I should like to put into the record will help members to understand better what I have to say to the house.
(Text):


Gordon Campbell Chown: If the subject of poultry
was introduced by the minister, then obviously the hon. member for Argenteuil-Deux-Montagnes would be in order and relevant under clause 1 where a slightly broader scope is

Farm Credit Act
allowed for debate. However, I would require the unanimous consent of the committee before this could be made a part of the member's speech and be printed in Hansard.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I repeat what I said earlier, Mr. Chairman. I did say, in giving reasons for the amendments to the act at present before the committee, that the purpose is to widen the terms of the act so that the corporation could lend for such specific purposes as poultry. However, there is little connection, if any, between the import of poultry into this country, which is a very small percentage of the total production of this country, and the present act. I would suggest very strongly that across this country today, snow being very close at hand in many parts of Canada, we are very anxious to get these amendments through so that we can do some land appraisals. These attempts on the part of hon. members to delay this legislation is a matter of serious consequence to this country.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


An hon. Member:: Nonsense.
(Translation):


Vincent Drouin: Mr. Chairman, if the minister is eager to see the bill enacted, I am sure that he will allow me to dispense with reading these figures and allow me to put them on Hansard, which will save the time of the house.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Order. You are 100 per cent wrong.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: Are you the chairman of the committee?
(Text):


Gordon Campbell Chown: Will the committee give the hon. member unanimous consent to have this table included as part of his speech in committee, as though it had been read?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Nugent:: No.


Gordon Campbell Chown: There is not unanimous consent.


Hazen Robert Argue: Oh, I think it is unanimous.


Terence James (Terry) Nugent: Not when I said no.


Gordon Campbell Chown: The hon. member has the alternative of reading the figures.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I have the alternative too, I believe, of pointing out that the imports of poultry in themselves have nothing to do with this particular act amendment whatsoever.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Is the Minister of Agriculture raising a point of order with respect to to the remarks of the hon. gentleman?
[The Chairman.]


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Yes. I am simply pointing out to the Chair that until the hon. member begins to show the committee more precisely and clearly what connection the discussion of the import of eggs or poultry has with the Farm Credit Act I think I have my responsibility to the committee to protest and to ask for a ruling from the Chair. If he intends to go on reading I am obliged to protest that procedure and ask for a ruling from the Chair.


Hazen Robert Argue: If you want some progress, let him make his speech.
(Translation):


Vincent Drouin: Mr. Chairman, I suggest that if our poultry farmers could obtain loans from the Farm Credit Corporation they could produce more poultry for consumption purposes and thus less would have to be imported.
(Text):


Gordon Campbell Chown: Shall clause 1 carry?


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Gordon Campbell Chown: Shall clause 2 carry? (Translation):


Vincent Drouin: I do not agree, Mr. Chairman, because I have not finished my remarks.
(Text):


An hon. Member:: Clause 1 is carried.


Gordon Campbell Chown: The hon. member had taken his seat and I gathered that he had finished his address. Will the committee give unanimous consent to reverting to clause 1 so that he can continue his remarks? Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
(Translation):


Vincent Drouin: Mr. Chairman, we import more than 20 million poultry for consumption purposes only, while we have in this country a great number of poultry farmers who would be only too glad to increase their production and thus help check unemployment in Canada. But they do not have the financial means to do so, they do not have the necessary capital to build new hen houses, neither to buy in great quantity the feed grain which they would need. Finally, they do not have the necessary capital to buy in great quantity the chicks they would like to raise and feed.
Their only solution at present is to be financed by a grain company which, in doing so, can count on a constant and non-competitive market for its products, or else by a chain store company which can thus count on a constant supply of chickens at a relatively low price. In both cases, the poultry farmers are losing completely the control

of their business and are becoming, to all intents and purposes, salaried workers in their own business. Neither the grain companies nor the chain store companies will finance poultry farmers with a view to help them; they will simply do so because of a financial advantage. Besides, how could we blame them, any more than the hon. member for Villeneuve (Mr. Caouette) has blamed the companies which are financing his car sales.
Grain companies, like those finance companies of the hon. member for Villeneuve, will finance a business or a sale only with a view to making a profit. But, meanwhile, our poultry farmers are getting discouraged and wilfully abandon poultry farming, when they are not simply put out of business. In my constituency only, that of Argenteuil-Deux-Montagnes, there are at least about 50 poultry farms which used to be very prosperous and which are now completely abandoned.
And yet, we have imported from the United States, in the last fiscal year, more than 20 million birds for consumption purposes.
Is there a solution to that problem? I see a double solution. First, loans should be granted to our poultry farmers, as loans are granted to other farmers, because is it not true that poultry farming is also part of agriculture?
On the other hand, it seems to me that the government could put a stop to that real dumping from our neighbours to the south in our country, because we know that through its austerity program the government succeeded in putting a stop or in making more difficult the importation of goods we cannot produce here and that we must import. Therefore we are justified in wondering if this same government could not put an embargo on the importation of poultry, in order to help our poultry farmers who certainly have not been spoiled in the last five years.
To come back to the financing of farm loans, I would ask the Minister of Agriculture to give us some details on the amendments he made or intends to make concerning the rules of the corporation which those in charge of farm loans have to carry out. The minister told us that henceforth the value of a poultry operation would be taken into account in the assessment and the appraisal of the economical soundness of a farm. Unless I am mistaken, he added however that the corporation had no intention of financing units exclusively devoted to poultry farming. Could the minister give us more details in that regard and tell us what will be the proportion of loans granted to poultry farms by the Farm Credit Corporation?
Farm Credit Act
It is imperative that credit be made available to our farmers who operate a poultry farm in order to take advantage of the local market at least.


Mr. Vincent:: Mr. Chairman, will the
hon. member allow a question?


Vincent Drouin: Certainly.


Clément Vincent: Did the dollar devaluation assist the poultry farmers of his area in any way?


Vincent Drouin: The dollar devaluation, Mr. Chairman, cost close to 10 per cent to all those in my district who had worked their hands raw trying to save a few dollars. That is what they got from the dollar devaluation.


Clément Vincent: As far as prices are concerned, did the dollar devaluation bring any advantage to the poultry farmers of his riding?
(Text):


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, I should like to try to answer some of the questions before too many speeches pile up on me. I will start with the last speaker, the hon. member for Argenteuil-Deux-Montagnes. I am glad to have his explanation with regard to this loan and I will be reading what he said in detail in Hansard because I more than anyone else want no suggestion of politics such as the hon. member suggested was going on in Argenteuil-Deux-Montagnes. One thing I am sure of is that the Farm Credit Act cannot work if it operates on a political basis. This is what destroyed the old farm loan board and I certainly do not want to see it destroy the Farm Credit Corporation. If any hon. member brings to my attention any evidence of monkeyshines I will certainly see to it that the matter is dealt with immediately.
I did ask the Chair to give me a ruling, and the hon. member came around to what was concerning him in connection with poultry imports. I gather that the hon. member was emphasizing the need of more capital in the poultry industry. If he is in favour of that, as I gathered he was, I would point out that this is one of the reasons why we have brought these amendments before the house, to give the Farm Credit Corporation the legal authority to make loans to poultry operators and other types of specialized enterprises, which they have not been able to do in the past.
So far as the question of size is concerned, I dealt with this matter before. We were not thinking in terms of the monster poultry enterprises, which have to be dealt with under other available legislation, but of the family farm using poultry as an enterprise, usually on small acreage, from which they want to make a living because they cannot possibly

Farm Credit Act
make a living from what one might call the more general types of agriculture. The amendments now allow us to assist these people. It is true that the amendments are made in the regulations but I have already announced this in the house.
The hon. member also made representations that we should stop the importation of poultry into this country. I cannot help but say in passing that we have just listened for two days to debate on a want of confidence motion in which it was said we should remove all taxes on goods coming into the country.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Only taxes imposed by order in council.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I am sure the hon. member was here last night and voted for that motion and that principle. There has been an intervention by the hon. senator Fogbound-I will not say his name is Jack S.-who has just said that the motion they put forward was put forward simply because the government had acted in such and such a way; but we understood that the reason why-


John Whitney Pickersgill: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, the minister recently raised a point of order with regard to a perfectly straightforward request such as is normally granted by the committee, particularly to a new member. The minister, this paragon of all virtues, is now seeking to revive a debate that was settled last night and, as Your Honour knows, this is completely contrary to our rules and should not be permitted at all. If it is permitted, I give Your Honour fair warning that I will take just as much time as the minister does in reopening that debate. I would strongly advise the minister, if he wants to get his bill passed, to stick to the bill and nothing else but the bill. I would remind the minister that my intervention only came after the minister himself had started to advert to a debate that was closed.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, I should like to raise-


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, if I inadvertently-


Hazen Robert Argue: -another point of order for your consideration. I am making no objection but I should like you to consider it and make a ruling. I would ask you if the minister is speaking on clause 1 of the bill. If he is then I think other members will have to be given the opportunity to reply. I understood that clause 1 had been passed and that one member was allowed, by unanimous consent, to conclude his speech. If clause 1 is still before the committee that is perfectly all right with me, but I should like to know whether we are still on clause 1.


Gordon Campbell Chown: I would have to see my own remarks at that particular stage. However, it seems to me I recall having asked for unanimous consent to revert to clause 1 so that the hon. member could complete his remarks. It seems to me that the Chair is automatically obligated to call clause 1 again and get it passed, so that I would say that at the moment we are still on clause 1.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: If I may bring peace to this little gathering this afternoon, I apologize to the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate for trying to be facetious when I am not capable of being so, successfully. I simply want to go on and deal with some of the points mentioned by other members on the first clause. The hon. member for Kent (Ont.), put forward an appeal for the special interests of the farmers of southwestern Ontario, and he is quite correct, of course. The value of their land, the activities and the productive power of the farmers of southwestern Ontario are tremendously different from those of the majority of farmers in Canada. Coming from the west as I do, I can say to him that we sincerely envy members of parliament who represent these wealthy counties of Ontario. You are so wealthy and so productive that you do not talk in terms of the need for small loans but rather in terms of much larger loans than the $27,500 which is the limit under the act.
This brings up a very difficult point for the Farm Credit Corporation. Under the act the corporation is directed not to lend money to farmers who do not need it. I have been through southwestern Ontario on many occasions and I know that many of the farmers there, though not all of them, want loans of $80,000 or $100,000 or $200,000, and I simply point out that there is no provision in this act for the making of such loans. I see that the hon. member is shaking his head but he did refer to increasing the amount of the loans. I think he has a point there that we might be able to consider at some time in the future, the increasing of the amount of the loans; but we have to be very careful about trying to meet all the needs in this particular field-


Roger-Joseph Teillet: You are just twisting.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I am very sorry if I have annoyed the hon. member for St. Boniface.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: You don't annoy me at all.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: He said that I was just twisting. I have apologized to the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate for being a little bit discourteous to him and I hope the hon. member for St. Boniface will do the same to me.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: No discourtesy intended.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I think the hon. member for Kent, Ontario, has a point and I hope he will join with me when we get around to the question of raising the ceiling on these loans. However, this will have to be done after we have had more time to deal with the tremendous backlog of demands for loans from farmers who are away below that scale. I know it is very difficult for the hon. member to go back and tell a farmer who wants a loan of $30,000 or $40,000 that he is above the limit at the present time, but that this matter will be considered in the future. At the present time we have only 200 employees in the Farm Credit Corporation and we have a large backlog of applications from smaller farmers who do need loans. I hope hon. members from southwestern Ontario will be patient and allow us to deal with this part of the problem first.
Reference was made to a delay of six months. I am very much interested in these cases and if the hon. member will give me the name of the particular farmer who had difficulty I will look up his file. If I find this is true I am quite prepared to remove solicitors, appoint others and make sure that there is no needless delay.
The hon. member for Bellechasse raised a question concerning appraisal fees. I think I have already made it clear, Mr. Chairman, that this matter is under discussion now by the Farm Credit Corporation. The minister, as such, does not have anything to do with the details of these appraisal fees. The Farm Credit Corporation, in discussion with the farm leaders who are on the advisory committee of that corporation, will be making a decision. They will give it to me, and then I can take it to the cabinet to obtain approval from the governor in council. This matter is under advisement now and there is nothing I can do beyond saying that the amendments that will be seen later on in the bill dealing with this question make it possible for us to get rid of anomalies in connection with appraisal fees. I do trust most members will be satisfied.
I think those are the main points that it would be of value to answer at this stage. Any other questions, I will try to answer as we go along.
(Translation):


Mr. Legare:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to mention a rather special case to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hamilton) and I am convinced that he or his parliamentary secretary will try to find a solution. Five farmers in the same village have bought what is called a combine. You know what a combine is? It is a farm machine containing a harvester, a thresher and a swather with a reel and spreader.
Farm Credit Act
That machine cost them $13,000. However, before buying it, they had tried, without success, to obtain a loan from the Farm Credit Corporation. So they asked a finance company which agreed to lend them $10,000, but at 12 per cent interest a year, which amounts to $100 interest a month or $1,200 a year.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Did they ask the bank?


Gérard Légaré: No, they asked a finance company.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Because there are farm improvement loans.


Gérard Légaré: In fact, I think that they asked the bank, but I was told that they had first asked the Farm Credit Corporation, because they knew that the corporation would grant a loan at only 5 per cent interest. Besides, since the provincial government gives a rebate of 2J per cent yearly, their interest would have amounted only to 2\ per cent rather than 12 per cent, the rate of interest charged by finance companies.
I do not know if my arithmetic is-


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Here is what I can tell to the hon. member. I doubt that the Farm Credit Corporation would grant a loan for purchasing farm machinery, but it does so for farm improvements. The amount for that purpose has been increased by the government from $5,000 to around $7,000. However, I want to know if the five farmers in question asked the bank to lend them the necessary amount for the purchase of that farm machinery.


Gérard Légaré: In reply to the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon), I should like to point out that paragraph (a) of section 16 reads as follows:
(a) the proceeds of the loan shall be used for
the following purposes only, namely:
(ii) to purchase fertilizers, seed, livestock, tools, machinery and any implements and equipment necessary for the efficient operation of the mortgaged farm.
This is what we find in paragraph (a), section 16, of the Farm Credit Act. I am surprised to hear-


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: That is the amended act.


Gérard Légaré: No, that is section 16 of the act, before it was amended.
But, in any case, Mr. Chairman, even if those farmers did not go to the bank, they made an application to the Farm Credit Corporation, which could not lend them the money because, apparently, their property was

Farm Credit Act
already mortgaged, fully or in part. They were told: your farms are already mortgaged.
The sum of $13,000 is already quite an amount, so much so that a finance company agreed to lend them money at 12 per cent interest.
I feel that the government should consider helping those people.
I was told, for instance, that this year those five persons worked with their famous combine for some 20 farmers. The machine was at work during more than 400 hours. Surely, that farm implement was useful to that community. I know of other places where such implements are used and are very useful.
Now, I ask that the corporation reconsider those cases. I am prepared to give them the names of the people concerned because it is a case of paying $50 instead of $240 each in interest every year. That is worth while because for each one of them, it represents a saving of $190 for the first year only, and the interest charges will decrease with the liquidation of the debt. That is what I wished to say this afternoon.
I am not asking the minister or his parliamentary secretary for an immediate answer, but I am interested in that case and I hope it will be given special consideration.
As for the question I had put to the minister concerning the establishment of an office of the Farm Credit Corporation in my district, I was given the answer that the matter was under consideration. The lower St. Lawrence area is large enough to justify the establishment of an office of the corporation with the necessary staff. Anyone who is impartial will recognize, no doubt, that the proper place for the opening of such an office is Rimouski, the very heart of the lower St. Lawrence area. I am wondering if I should not commend the minister and his parliamentary secretary right now for the favourable decision they will make.
(Text):


Gordon Campbell Chown: Shall clause 1 carry?
Clause 1 agreed to.
On clause 2-


Mr. Nasserden:: I wonder if the minister would consider changing the wording in section 16, paragraph (v) in the last line, to read, "a more economic unit", instead of just "an economic unit".


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, I believe this matter was raised originally by the hon. member for Assiniboia and is one of those dialectic questions. What is an economic unit and what is a more economic unit? I do not

believe you strengthen the legislation by inserting the word "more", because it is meaningless. What really counts is the activity of the Farm Credit Corporation. All I can say is that when I first raised this point in discussion with the hon. member for Assiniboia I said that if he meant a more economic unit in the sense of moving toward that end in a substantial way, I would go along with him. Later on, I detected some who thought a loan should be made just to get a farm going and without achieving what we believe are the minimum standards of an economic unit.
I think this is an academic debate. If I had to go before a court and argue that "more" means what I think it means, then any person could come in and say, "Under this act I have the right to a loan of $200," even if we could show it was unwise to grant that loan. I am not arguing or quibbling about it, but I am simply saying that I do not believe this word adds any real value to the act and therefore I do not think it is wise to put it in.


Edward Nasserden: The reason I brought this up is because the way the act is being interpreted by some of the officials leads to some doubt. When the act was first introduced on June 29, 1959, as reported at page 5255 of Hansard for that date, the Hon. Douglas Hark-ness, then minister of agriculture, said:
The proposed act authorizes the corporation to make loans on two basic types of long-term mortgage. One type is for loans to farmers on a basis similar to that now being granted under the Canadian Farm Loan Act, except that there are extensions and additions to the lending authority granted to the corporation as well as making the Farm Credit Corporation the successor to the Canadian farm loan board. Among these additions and extensions are included the raising of the maximum loan from $15,000 to $20,000, and the increase in the amount of loan authorized from 65 to 75 per cent of the appraised value of the farm lands and buildings.
The second type of farm mortgage credit makes provisions for loans to farmers upon the security of farm lands, buildings, livestock and equipment provided the borrower is between the ages of 21 and 45, has at least five years experience in farming, and the farming enterprise to be established with the aid of the loan Is an economic farm unit.
Many of the people working for the corporation have taken the position that if a loan does not improve a farm to be an economic farm unit then they are not interested in granting the application, and for that reason I think the word "more" should be included in this line.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, move an amendment.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: With respect to clause 2, subparagraph (iii) which reads as follows:
-to erect farm buildings or to clear, drain, irrigate, fence or make any other permanent improvements to the mortgaged farm or to other land used by the borrower as part of his farming enterprise,

I am not quite clear what is meant by the term "by the borrower as part of his farming enterprise". What form of tenure is intended? I wish the minister would explain that.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: This is one of the amendments that will be most beneficial to the provinces of British Columbia and Alberta. In fact I should not limit it to those two provinces because many provinces have crown lands held in the right of the province and farmers lease these lands for a period of years. In the past we have not been able to lend farmers money to do certain things on these leased lands, even though the money would improve their ability to pay us back and improve their productivity. This simply empowers the corporation to lend money to improve land, not only land which a farmer owns but land which he holds under lease from another person or from a government, or land which in some cases is privately held land which cannot be mortgaged.
This is something which was brought up by hon. members from British Columbia and Alberta, and we have made arrangements with these provinces so that we can do this.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I thank the minister for his explanation. I was not quite sure if that covered land leased from private owners.


Arthur Laing: I wish to say a few words about this bill and I shall start by saying I qualify as a representative of farmers because, although my riding, Vancouver South, is a purely urban riding it does have farmers in it. We have an Indian reserve there called the Musqueam Indian reserve and we have Chinese market gardeners whose land, on the score of fertility, I would back against any land in Canada. It has to be because they pay an annual rental of $125 per acre.
I am not making any representations on behalf of the Chinese market gardeners because they are so well off that they do not need any money from the minister, but I do wish to bring to the attention of the committee that in the allocation of these loans some preference should be given to the type of farming for which they are granted. In recent years we have averaged a surplus of about one and a half tons of wheat per man, woman and child in the country, and now we are being deluged with butterfat. If some priority were given in the allocation of loans it should be to types of agriculture which are wanted within Canada and for export purposes.
In the Peace river block in British Columbia we are developing a magnificent source of extremely high grade seed products. My hon. friend from Peace River is acquainted 27507-3-89
Farm Credit Act
with this and so is the hon. member for Cariboo, in whose riding that industry is principally located. However not enough attention has been given by this government, or by the provincial government for that matter, to the excellence of the seed produced in this area.
Members who are familiar with the quality of seeds will realize that either extreme northern latitudes or high mountain altitudes produce the best seed. When that seed is exported to the United States its productive capacity is enormous in a softer climate, and we are not capitalizing enough on our northern grown seed. It is highly viable and of tremendous value principally because it is disease free in the cold climatic conditions under which it grows.
Many of the diseases in seed crops and clover crops are carried by insects, largely aphids, I think they are called vectors, which carry the disease from one plant to another. In an extremely cold climate there are no aphids and the result is that we get a seed of fantastic value as compared with seed from other countries.
I would like to see a special standard set for Canadian seed grown above a certain northern latitude and I am quite certain that if we adhere to that standard we would export even more seed than we do at present. I think it is appropriate to mention that under this clause more than usual attention should be given to those sectors of the industry in which surpluses have not yet been created and where there is a tremendous demand for their products.
In the Dawson Creek area in British Columbia we export more than $3 million worth of seed products, and I recently saw 10 different shipments made up in the city of New Westminster for places like Glasgow and London, shipments of red clover, altasweet clover, various kinds of hard fescues and so on. There is a tremendous demand for such seeds and they enjoy a high reputation in Europe and the United States,
I hope the minister will pay some attention to such products and such areas and I can assure him we have great hopes of expanding markets for those products.


Mr. Baldwin:: I am glad the hon. member for Vancouver South brought this matter up because the area which I represent does produce tremendously large quantities of first grade seed. There is one district which is largely settled by farmers who came from the province of Quebec. They are good, capable and efficient farmers and over the last three years approximately $7 million has been lent to farmers in my constituency under this legislation. According to my calculations

Farm Credit Act
the largest percentage of the successful applicants, at least in the last two years, came from the districts of Folby, Guereville and Donnelly. They were mostly settlers from the province of Quebec and in raising first quality seed they have done a magnificent job. They produce a product which is eagerly sought all over Canada and North America and they are people who, for the purpose of making their productive units more economic, have taken advantage of the very excellent provisions of this legislation, more so than have people in other areas in my constituency.


Mr. Carter:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask three short questions of the minister. Question No. 1: is there any limit as to size or type of farm that may benefit from this clause? No. 2: can a small farmer secure a loan under this clause to fence and drain reclaimed, treated bog? No. 3: is there any agency in Newfoundland to which a small farmer may apply for a loan under this act or for advice as to eligibility for a loan.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, there is no limit on size; it is a question of whether it is an economic unit. Yes, they can borrow for fencing and reclaiming land; but, once again, it is for the purpose of making it a more economic unit. There is no office at the present time in Newfoundland; the closest office is at Moncton.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, I want to support the remarks of the hon. member for Rosthern with regard to the desirability of changing the phrase "an economic unit" to "a more economic unit". As the minister has said, I raised this question the other evening. At one point in his statement he agreed with me, but a few days later he seems to have changed his mind. However, I can see some great advantages in having the word "more" inserted before "economic unit". It would be a definite instruction to the Farm Credit Corporation that in the opinion of parliament this act should be used in such a way as to improve the net position of the farmers, and it would not be required arbitrarily that the loan must give the farmer a preconceived economic unit. I think this would be a most important change. I think this is the kind of change we often make in committee in the normal course of dealing with a measure of this kind. I thank the hon. member for Rosthern for having brought this question to our attention today. It is the kind of amendment that would commend itself to hon. members on the government side of the house as well as to hon. members 
on this side. I am, therefore, Mr. Chairman, going to move an amendment to this clause. I move:
That clause 2 be amended by adding the following :
(3) Paragraph (a) of section 16 is further amended by amending subparagraph (v) thereof by striking out the words "an economic unit" and substituting "a more economic unit".
I would ask the minister to give this matter his consideration. There may be some arguments for and against. The minister said that if he was a lawyer, he would say so-and-so. Neither am I a lawyer. I think he might give this matter his further mature consideration, and I would hope that when this amendment is put to the committee it would receive the unanimous approval of the committee. I think it would be most helpful for the administration of this act.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, I would be glad to take this matter under consideration, but I would like to say in passing that if the hon. member would read clause 2(v) again there might be a way that we could reword it which would make his amendment unnecessary and the whole section a little more clear. If you read it very carefully, the first four subsections in paragraph (a) are the precise instructions to the Farm Credit Corporation as to on what type of operation they can lend. Then there is the sort of catchall phrase contained in subparagraph (v):
any purpose that in the judgment of the corporation is necessary for the efficient operation of the mortgaged farm or will establish or increase the value of the farming enterprise in respect of which the loan is to be made-
I am not a lawyer, but I wonder why we do not stop right there, because we have achieved what the hon. member for Assiniboia and the hon. member for Rosthern are asking for. I still say, in all honesty, that I do not think it makes much difference to the farmer, because the farmer judges from what the Farm Credit Corporation is doing. But I will take this question under consideration and I would ask the hon. member if he too will consider, as a non-lawyer, if stopping at "made" might not have the desired result.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, as a non-lawyer I would be very happy to consider it. But would the minister also consider this. Supposing this is done; what is to stop the governor in council saying, under the regulations, that it shall be an economic unit, and therefore putting back into the operation of the act the very thing that is being taken out? I think if parliament uses the words "more economic unit", as has been put forward by the hon. member for Rosthern, it would be completely clear and it would not be possible

for the governor in council to pass a regulation which would restrict the thing which parliament itself had approved.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether before you put the motion I could just say one word. The minister and the hon. member have both taken pride in the fact that they are not lawyers. Neither am I. The point I was going to make was this. The amendment is on the record in Hansard; it has not yet been put. It might be that the minister, with the agreement of the hon. member, would like to consult his legal officers and perhaps my hon. friend from Assini-boia would agree to some changes in the wording that might, from a drafting point of view, make the amendment a little more acceptable. We are not seeking to create any difficulties; we are just seeking to get the best possible legislation.


Gordon Campbell Chown: Order. I was having some difficulty with the drafting of the amendment as it was worded and placed before me, in terms of tying it in with the actual clause we have under consideration. For that reason I was going to respectfully ask the committee to give it consideration so that it could be brought before the committee again by the hon. member for Assiniboia the next time we sit.
Order. So that the house may proceed to the consideration of private members' business pursuant to paragraph (3) of standing order 15 it is my duty to rise, report progress, and request leave to sit again later this day or at the next sitting of the house, as the case may be.
Clause 2 stands.
Progress reported.


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



NATIONAL ANTHEM


Mr. Maurice Cote (Chicoutimi) moved:: That this house is of the opinion that the government should introduce in this house a measure to provide the nation with a distinctive national anthem, namely "O Canada" as it exists at present in the French version and with an English version to he selected by the government.
(Translation):
He said: Mr. Speaker, in spite of a heavy cold brought about by the difference in temperature between Brazil and Canada, I wanted to be here this afternoon to submit my motion concerning the national anthem "O Canada", 27507-3-89J
National Anthem
which has been on the order paper since September 27.
First of all, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank you for your kindness in allowing my notice of motion to remain in the same position on the order paper, in spite of my absence as official representative of Canada at the fifty first conference of the Interparliamentary Union, which took place in Brazilia (Brazil) during the last two weeks. Kindly allow me also to thank the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Churchill) and the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) who were kind enough to speak in defence of my privileges during my absence.
The anthem "O Canada" is already virtually, though unofficially, recognized and accepted everyhere in Canada, and I know that all the hon. members of the house are proud to sing it in all circumstances, anywhere, in Canada or in foreign countries. This anthem has been known for a long time and it is just a matter for us this afternoon of having it put officially on the statutes of our country. The most patriotic and the greatest voices have praised the beauty of the anthem "O Canada" and it would take several volumes to record everything that has been said and written about it. The people want it eagerly and want to sing it with a greater enthusiasm than ever.
I do not propose to embark on a long speech in order to demonstrate the truth of what I am saying, because I am firmly convinced that no farsighted Canadian can oppose such a measure. That is why logic and common sense proclaim that we must, as from now, have our national anthem.
Besides we all know that on the occasion of a trip around the world by the Right Hon. Prime Minister of Canada (Mr. Diefen-baker) he was received and greeted everywhere by bands playing the anthem "O Canada". It was exactly the same thing during a similar tour of the former prime minister of Canada, the Right Hon. Louis S. St. Laurent.
On the other hand, I am just coming back from Brazil where I have had the honour of representing the House of Commons. I have done so with great pleasure, fully aware that I am first of all a Canadian. I noticed how all foreign parliamentarians listened with great respect and emotion to the Brazilian national anthem. I remember also an important national convention which I attended a few years ago in Ottawa, and which was

National Anthem
attended by Canadians of both language groups. My immediate neighbours were English speaking Canadians. When the time came for the singing of the national anthem, I was happily surprised to hear them sing the "O Canada" in English, as fervently as I was doing in French. 1 realized then that it was possible for English speaking and French speaking Canadians to work together for a greater Canada, in a true spirit of national unity. Indeed, whenever I hear "O Canada" being played on the carillon of the peace tower, I am deeply moved because it is the most beautiful anthem in the world. The well-known writer and musician, Eugene Lapierre, said this, one day:
As it often happens with great writers and musicians, it is a childhood souvenir which inspired the writing of such a masterpiece as "O Canada". A small waterfall was the source of inspiration for a lyrical and solemn march which is so beautiful that the first notes B-D-G sound like Mozart's "Magic Flute". The very first bars reach the musical heights of Canadian nature. The march of a people becomes a fugue in which all the battalions in history pass before one's eyes as is so well illustrated by this inspired verse of this sublime musical poem: "Thy history is an epic of the most dazzling deeds".
Therefore, the anthem "O Canada" is a chant, a hymn to the glory of our forefathers and of our country, which should make us prouder and happier to be Canadians. In consequence, I humbly request the hon. members of the house to refrain from speaking on this motion so as not to kill the project.
Let us show our good will through an act of sacrifice, and to this end, I suggest that the question be put immediately for the recognition of "O Canada" as the distinctive national anthem of our country, as it exists at present in its French version and according to an English version which would be chosen by the government.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding the request just made by the hon. member for Chicoutimi (Mr. Cote), I think it is proper for someone from another party to add a few words on this motion, just a few words, in order not to be held responsible if the motion is not put to a vote today.
In October 1956, I was invited by Senator Thorvaldson, to a football game in Winnipeg, and I must say I was quite surprised when, arriving on the field, we heard the organ playing the first bars of "O Canada" and we saw a crowd of about 20,000 rise and sing our national anthem, and this in a part of Canada which is considered as rather English, while

here in Ottawa, in Toronto, in Hamilton, people were singing "God Save the Queen" and dared to call it the national anthem.
(Text):


Mr. McDonald:: That is wrong.


Alexis Pierre Caron: In 1956 it was not wrong. I am speaking of 1956, and it was right then.
(Translation):
And since then, we have seen students from Barrie, Ontario, rise in protest, not against "God Save the Queen", but against the fact that "God Save the Queen" was being referred to as our national anthem. They are right on that point.
I have always rebelled somewhat on hearing the announcement before a football game or a hockey game or any other event: "Our national anthem" and then hearing "God Save the Queen".
A national anthem is an anthem which is peculiar to one country only. The "Marseillaise" is not sung in countries other than France; the American anthem is not sung elsewhere than in the United States. A national anthem must be a country's own anthem and "God Save the Queen" is not proper to Canada. It is an anthem which is sung in all parts of the commonwealth. It is rather a royal anthem which we like to sing on certain occasions, a royal anthem which is perhaps sung too often here in Canada without the protocol observed in England.
In England as a matter of fact when the Queen is not present they only play the first bars of "God Save the Queen." But here, whether the Governor General is present or not, it is played in its entirety. Is it that we have become more English than the English themselves?
Some time ago, I received letters about my intervention in a previous debate on the matter. I have here a letter from someone of Ottawa who congratulates me for having asked for a national anthem other than "God Save the Queen". I have also a letter from a minister of the United Church of Canada, who writes, among other things:
(Text):
I note your statement about the desirability of "O Canada" becoming the national anthem to replace "God Save the Queen".
(Translation):
And I answered him-the full reply would be to long to read-that I never asked that "God Save the Queen" be replaced as our national anthem. I merely asked that things be set in their proper place, that the royal anthem, "God Save the Queen" be left to the glory of our sovereign and that it be sung

with warmth and devotion, because she is Canada's sovereign. But when it comes to a national anthem, the only anthem is "O Canada", because it seems to be accepted by almost everybody in Canada.
A few years ago a survey was made in the schools-the English high schools in Canada-among the students of 18, 19 and 20 years of age, and 48 per cent said they were in favour of "O Canada", while 17 per cent were against it and the remainder had no opinion. This shows that the idea of having "O Canada" as our national anthem is spreading constantly.
I realize that some people do not like the English version. It does not seem so bad to me:
(Text):
0	Canada! Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.
(Translation):
1	think those words properly tit our national anthem and are not a translation of the French verses.
It may be that the thing to do would be to find a verbatim wording of that hymn which would allow us to sing it in both English and French. But on the other hand, I think we should have a national anthem as well as a national flag. Those things are a must for Canada. We have become an adult nation. Since the treaty of Westminster, Canada is on an equal basis with Britain and the other members of the commonwealth. We do not have to accept what comes from abroad, no more than "La Marseillaise" should be sung in Quebec or elsewhere in the country as the national anthem of Canada.
I have heard it said in this house that the music of "O Canada" was not beautiful, that Calixa Lavallee's composition was poor.
These people must have heard it sung badly, because it seems to me that there is something to be said for the music.
It is true that in the province of Quebec many people sing it like a dirge and I think that if, in our schools, "O Canada" were sung with vigour and strength, we would have a wonderful anthem that would deserve to be sung throughout the country.
In order not to prolong this debate, I win end my remarks here hoping that hon. members will adopt this motion and give Canada a truly national anthem.
(Text):


Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, I will not detain the house for long. However, I wish to express our warm agreement with and acceptance of the excellent resolution introduced by the hon. member for
National Anthem
Chicoutimi (Mr. Cote). I am particularly happy to do so when I recognize the source from which the resolution comes. We believe that Canada should have a distinctive national anthem and a distinctive national flag. We believe that the hon. member has made the most appropriate selection possible when he suggests that "O Canada" be that distinctive national anthem.
There are some people who are of the opinion that flags, anthems and symbols of that sort are unimportant or unnecessary. We do not agree with that opinion, Mr. Speaker. It is true that in the world of today we must build a world community and we must develop new loyalties to international institutions such as the United Nations and the British commonwealth of nations. However, in our view, there is no inconsistency between the development of new international loyalties and a sound sense of nationalism and national pride in Canada. It is our belief that symbols of nationalism such as a national flag and a national anthem increase sound national pride and a sense of unity which we most urgently need in Canada.
As we all know, Canada is approaching her one hundredth birthday which she will celebrate within a few years. We in this party believe that, before that one hundredth birthday, we should have all the reasonable symbols of adult nationhood, including a national flag, a national anthem and, may I add, a constitution made, passed and amendable within Canada.
In our view "O Canada" is the right selection because, as the hon. member has said, it is a great anthem. It is one which creates in those who sing a sense of pride, loyalty and of responsibility for Canada which we all need from one end of Canada to the other.
My riding, Mr. Speaker, is that of Greenwood. It used to be described as a riding in Tory Toronto. I imagine there was a day when the representatives from this riding, who were always Tories in the past, would have disapproved of this resolution. I wish to assure all members of this house-and thank God for it-that Tory Toronto is no longer Tory Toronto. Many people in the constituency were born in Great Britain, many of them either in Scotland or in England; and they retain their deep loyalty to the commonwealth and to the old country. They will continue to sing "God Save the Queen", not as a national anthem but as a symbol of the fact that we remain part of the commonwealth and loyal to the crown.
However, Mr. Speaker, things have changed in my riding. As I say, it is no longer a Tory riding. We believe in national symbols and we are very happy to support the resolution before the house. As has already been said

National Anthem
by the hon. member who introduced the resolution, many Canadians have already adopted this song as the national anthem. Is it not time that the house made this official and passed this resolution as a step towards making it the fully recognized official national anthem of Canada?
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words in French, not to show off my accent, which is deplorable, but to show that my feelings are most friendly.
For too long already, Canada has been without a national anthem or a national flag. The resolution submitted by the hon. member for Chicoutimi (Mr. Cotd) is excellent and comes at the right time. We support it without reservation.
(Text):


Robert Matthew Turnbull McDonald: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a few comments on this motion. I was prompted to do so by the hon. member for Hull (Mr. Caron) who indicated, as I understood his remarks, that in Hamilton "O Canada" is not played. This is not a fact. The only thing that embarrasses me as a Canadian is that in Hamilton two national anthems are played, half of each.
I should like to point out that in the speech from the throne there is a paragraph indicating that the government is going to set up a conference committee to look into the question of a national flag and a national anthem.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


An hon. Member:: It is not a committee we want.


Robert Matthew Turnbull McDonald: I think we must take our responsibilities seriously and realize that we do not have a wholly federal system.


Some hon. Members:: Question.


Robert Matthew Turnbull McDonald: I wish you would hold your tongue. Under our federal and provincial system I think it is the responsibility of these governments to decide what should be done about this matter. Hon. members in the Social Credit party may jest at my remarks. I am in favour of the motion that has been moved and I want to make that perfectly clear, provided the French version is the same as the English version. What I do not like about this whole thing is that there seems to be a tendency on the part of politicians to create confusion between English and French Canada. In this house there always seems to be a building of walls, Tory Toronto and Tory Hamilton against Montreal and Quebec.
I want to make it perfectly clear that the people in the riding I represent are Canadians first. My only reason for entering this debate

was that I noted in the remarks of the hon. member for Hull that he was again trying in a devious way to set up this cleavage.
National anthems and flags have usually come about through revolution and war. The United States just did not produce a flag or a national anthem. They came about because of the national feeling within their country. In the interests of national unity I believe that parliament and the government should take a stand on the matter of a national anthem, as well as other things. I also wish to point out that over the years the Conservative party has done many things to bring about Canadian independence. Sir Robert Borden started the repatriation of the constitution about 1918 or 1919, and Mr. Bennett, about whom we heard a lot in the house in the last five years, took some very great steps in 1931 and 1932. As indicated by the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker), we want to go ahead and be able to look after our own business.


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Essex East: Under this Prime Minister we never go ahead.


Robert Matthew Turnbull McDonald: Would
you like to stand up?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I was just saying to my honourable and amiable friend that under the present Prime Minister we never go ahead.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. With the Speaker in the chair I regret that hon. members have to ask their questions from their own seats.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Excuse me, Mr. Speaker. I did not realize I was not in my seat. I am very sorry. I thank you for the promotion.


Gordon Minto Churchill: You were confused last night and you are still confused.


Robert Matthew Turnbull McDonald: In the constituency I represent there are people in all walks of life who have come there not only from France but from the Ukraine, Poland, Germany and, in fact from all over the world. I think they feel that we must have national symbols to bring about a national feeling in this nation. But I also believe that it is not the responsibility of the federal government alone to go ahead and produce a flag or a national anthem.


An hon. Member:: It is.


Robert Matthew Turnbull McDonald: We hear a great deal in the house from time to time about the rights of the provinces, and if I as a member from Ontario were to get up and advocate federal control of education I am sure that the members from Quebec would not like it. All I am saying is that in principle, I support the idea of a national anthem and a national flag, but I think they should be

brought about through a national effort by the provincial and federal governments so that we can have a truly national feeling and no one can evade his responsibilities regardless of the party to which he belongs.
As the father of three children I should like them to be able to sing a national anthem while at the same time not forgetting my parentage. I believe this should be done, and I believe that the action the government is taking is the best course to follow. There are many other subjects in the field of English-French relationships. The whole situation was initially created because of a war that took place in Canada, and I think it is time that we in the House of Commons recognized the fact that we are Canadians first and our origins should be forgotten. I hope that the government will set up this federal-provincial conference so that there can be some effective action in this regard.


Arthur Laing: Will the hon. member permit a question?


Robert Matthew Turnbull McDonald: Yes.


Arthur Laing: Did I understand the hon. member to say that Canada was not a nation and that we were carrying on under an incomplete national system that was federal and provincial in scope, and was it the inference, therefore, that the word "nation" had no validity?


Robert Matthew Turnbull McDonald: I think the hon. member is being very naive if he thinks that is what I meant. I meant that the government of Canada works in conjunction with the provinces under the British North America Act and there are responsibilities that the provinces have and responsibilities that the federal government has. Repatriation of our constitution has been going on over a period of years. At this time the government has under consideration the amending of our own constitution. I truly feel that we will only be a nation when this is so, in the legal sense of the word, and if my hon. friend from Vancouver wants to read something into that, that is his business.


John Carr Munro: Mr. Speaker, I also wish along with Mr. Caron of this party to endorse the main principle contained in the motion moved by Mr. Cotd.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. There is one point here. This is something that I am sure was not done intentionally but it is something that I think should be drawn to the attention of new members particularly. References to hon. members are not to be made by reference to surname but by reference to their constituency solely. It is only when certain bills or motions are called that the Speaker will
National Anthem
address an hon. member by his name. I only mention this for the guidance of hon. members.


John Carr Munro: Mr. Speaker, I apologize for my slip with respect to proper manners in the house and I hope the hon. members will forgive me. I was saying, Mr. Speaker, as another speaker for this party has said, that we endorse the principle of the motion. There is one aspect of it, however, that I think should be open to question and that is the phraseology. The motion reads in part as follows:
-as it exists at present in the French version and with an English version to be selected by the government.
It seems to me that "O Canada" is commonly sung in English throughout the country and I think Canadians as a whole are fairly cognizant of all its words. Therefore it seems to me that there is unnecessary verbiage in the resolution. Aside from that comment, I think it would be a wise thing if the motion were passed immediately.
I should like also to comment on the suggestion made by the hon. member for Hamilton South (Mr. McDonald) when he referred to the common practice in the Hamilton area. I must say that it is a disappointment to many of us in Hamilton who attend the big four football games. After all, that is probably the only time when such a large number of people are all together in one spot for any length of time. It is a disappointment to us that "O Canada" is not sung. There have been several Hamiltonians who have taken objection to this procedure. Perhaps as a result of the discussion in this house, this practice, not only in Hamilton but elsewhere throughout the country, will cease and we will now start singing "O Canada".
Another concept with a resolution such as this is the concept of nationalism, and I believe that concept should be taken into consideration. I believe we will all agree that nationalism is a good thing provided it does not go to extremes. If the passage of this resolution would tend to encourage nationalism in this country from the point of view of giving all these varied cultures, religions and races which make up this country, a common tie, a common cause to rally around, a standard to fight for, then I think it would be a good thing. I think this is an idea to which the government should give immediate consideration. I believe you can relate nationalism to Canada's reaction in the Cuban crisis. I think it is in times of crisis that Canadians settle down to think in terms of a co-ordinated whole, think in terms of union and not of their own sectional

National Anthem
interests. I think that the passage of a resolution such as this will tend to retard that type of thinking on the part of Canadians.
Another point upon which I should like to comment is the Liberal record from the point of view of endeavouring to emphasize this feeling of Canadianism, if I might use that expression. I should like to refer to past Liberal acts such as dropping the name "Royal", dropping the name "Dominion", and so on. I should like also to refer to the establishment in 1949 of the Supreme Court of Canada as the court of last resort. I think we must all recall that prior to that time there was still recourse to a further court in the United Kingdom. I refer, too, to the Liberal action in introducing the Canadian citizenship legislation. My study of this legislation leads me to believe that it makes the obligation to the laws of Canada the primary obligation of all Canadians. I believe the Liberal administration of that day should be commended.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I should like to refer to the suggestion put forward by the last speaker that the matter should be referred to a committee. This sounds very familiar and sounds like the old type of procrastination to which this country has become accustomed from the Tory benches whenever definite action is needed. So far, we have all agreed in this house that definite action is needed. In our debates all we hear from the government of the day is suggestions for committees. I am sure that committees which are suggested by the government are synonymous in the minds of Canadians with procrastination, no results, riding on the fence, avoiding taking any action, and this type of thing. I do not believe that is the type of thing any of us in this house want to condone. I feel we have all sincerely expressed our opinion of the merit of this type of legislation and there should be immediate action taken in respect of it.


Mr. Nicholas Mandziuk (Marquette):: Mr. Speaker, I agree with all that has been said-


An hon. Member:: Well then, sit down.


J. Nicholas (Nick) Mandziuk: I listened very attentively while hon. gentlemen opposite spoke, and I presume I am entitled to the same consideration. As I said, Mr. Speaker, I agree with everything the sponsor of this resolution, the hon. member for Chicoutimi (Mr. Cote) said about "O Canada". This resolution raises certain problems. Many people have strong feelings on the matter that is embodied in this resolution. We cannot walk over them roughshod just because a few of us want to do so.
[Mr. Munro.)
I do not believe it is the duty of this parliament to do that. No one has brought out any proof-


An hon. Member:: Shame.


J. Nicholas (Nick) Mandziuk: Did I hear "shame" sir? Shame for what? I have not said anything of which I am ashamed, Mr. Speaker, and I do not intend to do so.


Arthur Laing: Do not get them aroused; they are your supporters.


J. Nicholas (Nick) Mandziuk: Have you any comments or questions, sir?


Mr. Speaker:: Order; the hon. member for Marquette has the floor. If other hon. members wish to speak, they have a right to speak once they have the floor.


J. Nicholas (Nick) Mandziuk: Mr. Speaker, if a resolution such as this were proposed in any of the newly created nations which did not have any historical background, did not have any cultural background, did not have a national anthem, I would see the justification for it. However, the part of the country from which I come, referred to as the woolly west, has a national anthem. As a matter of fact, we prefer to sing two of them. We have "O Canada" and "God Save the Queen", and every meeting I have attended, or most of the meetings I have attended-


An hon. Member:: Sing "O Canada".


J. Nicholas (Nick) Mandziuk: Mr. Speaker, I cannot carry on with these interruptions.


An hon. Member:: That is good.


Mr. Speaker:: Order; I would ask hon. gentlemen to please observe the rules that are a tradition in this house. The hon. member who has the floor has a right to speak, and an hon. member who has not the floor should wait his turn.


Mr. Beaule:: May I ask a question of the hon. member?


J. Nicholas (Nick) Mandziuk: Yes.


Jean Robert Beaulé: You have just said that in your constituency they sing two national anthems. How can you say that when you have none?


J. Nicholas (Nick) Mandziuk: Mr. Speaker, may I say in reply that I believe what I was saying will bring this out. We commence public proceedings, whatever they may be, by singing "O Canada". We love to sing "O Canada"; everybody does. We sing it with enthusiasm in spite of the fact it is not on the statute books. It is in the hearts of the people, Mr. Speaker. However, at the end of the proceedings, whether they be teachers conventions, school concerts or church functions, we sing "God

National Anthem
Save the Queen". What is wrong with that? Many of us have very strong feelings of loyalty to Her Majesty. This, Mr. Speaker, we do without having anything on the statute books.
Most hon. members in this house are politicians and most of us have spoken to a French audience. I am sure hon. members on all sides of the house have spoken to an audience which contained Canadians of Polish, Ukrainian and German extraction. Did it hurt them to hear, after "God save the Queen" was sung "Sche ne womerla Ukraina" in Ukrainian which in translation means "Ukraine has not died"? Have they not heard "Jeszeze Polska nie zginela" which in translation means "Poland has not died".
I am sure most hon. members have heard these; and if it were a German community and members were pleading for their votes thy would not object to hearing, after "O Canada" "Einigkeit, Recht und Freiheit" which in translation means "Unity, right and freedom".
I would support the resolution but it seems to me it precludes the singing of any other national anthem. We are a nation made up of peoples from different parts of the world. The two basic races are English and French and we have bilingualism. If any party has fostered and encouraged that, it is ours. Then we have freedom.
There is a phrase in the resolution which intrigues me. I think it was the hon. member for Hamilton East (Mr. Munro) who directed my attention to it, that the government would be called upon to agree upon an English version. I was under the impression, probably erroneously, that Canadians of French extraction sing "O Canada" exactly the way we sing it but in the French language. I have heard it in the Polish and Ukrainian languages and they were exact translations, but this gives me an indication that those of French origin, when they sing it in French, have a different version of it and I would like to hear what the exact English translation of that would be.
If we want one national anthem it has got to be exact in one language, either English or French, which are the basic languages. We need not worry about the other ethnic groups because they will get proper translations. As I said before, people have strong feelings on this subject. If you can convince me that by putting this on the statute books it is not going to preclude or forbid the singing of other anthems-


Gilles Grégoire: Right.


J. Nicholas (Nick) Mandziuk: If you can convince me it is going to give us greater unity-


Gilles Grégoire: Right.


J. Nicholas (Nick) Mandziuk: -that it is going to give us greater loyalty-


Gilles Grégoire: Right.


J. Nicholas (Nick) Mandziuk: But, sir, I believe we have that. Hon. members should go to our western towns where we have monuments to commemorate those who gave their lives for Canada. They will see Slavic, German, English, French and all kinds of names on them. Does not that indicate that we have unity? Was not our answer to the call in the last war an indication that we have unity?
I do not want to be accused of talking this motion out, although certainly I could do so if I wanted to, but in closing I wish to say that the house has more important matters to worry about to foster unity and to strengthen that Canadianism for which our boys fought and died, rather than squabble about which anthem we are going to sing, whether it is going to be "O Canada" or "Jeszeze Polska nie zginela."


Mr. J. E. Walker (York Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to say just a few words in order to leave time for a vote. I want to put on the record something that some hon. members of the house may not be aware of, and which many members of the public may not know. I read from The Liberal Programme, which was a guide for us during the election campaign and outlined the goals and objectives of our party. Under the heading "Canadian Institutions" it reads:
Adopt a distinctively Canadian flag and anthem. Within two years of taking office, a new Liberal government will submit to parliament a design for a flag which cannot be mistaken for the emblem of any other country. When adopted, this will be the flag of Canada. "O Canada'' will be proclaimed our official anthem.
In the second paragraph under the heading "Maintain the honour given to traditional symbols" it goes on to say:
The union jack will be flown on appropriate occasions as a symbol of our membership in the commonwealth. A new Liberal government will also maintain the honour given to the traditional anthem which expresses Canada's devotion to the sovereign.
This is our objective and I might say that we were very close last night to having the opportunity of carrying out this program.
There is one thing in the motion which gives me cause for concern. It says that the English version is to be selected by the government. I would much prefer to see the English version of "O Canada" selected by parliament. In view of the speeches which members of the government have made on this subject I am not at all sure they should be trusted with the task of selecting the English version.

National Anthem


Mr. G. H. Aiken (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: On rising to say a few words on this motion I wish to advise my hon. friends opposite that I am not going to talk it out.


An hon. Member:: Who is?


Gordon Harvey Aiken: I don't know. The first comment I would like to make is that the hon. member for Hamilton East (Mr. Munro) objected to the setting up of a committee, as was proposed in the speech from the throne, and hon. members opposite seem to have the feeling that setting up a committee accomplishes nothing. In reply I say committees do accomplish things and I am positive it is the firm intention of the government to set up a committee, well in advance of the hundredth anniversary of confederation, which will decide on a national anthem and national flag.


Mr. Knowles:: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the hon. member could let me ask him one brief question, to correct the record. The speech from the throne, I think, suggested a dominion-provincial conference, not a committee of this house.


John Whitney Pickersgill: How much more ridiculous could you get?


An hon. Member:: Two-flag Jack.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: Mr. Speaker, I accept the question of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles). I did not suggest that a committee of this house was going to consider it, but I did suggest it was going to be submitted to a committee, or a conference, if that is the more correct word. The objection that I heard from the hon. member of the Social Credit group was that a committee, or a conference, would not accomplish what they wanted to do and that we ought today to settle this problem by a vote.


Gilles Grégoire: Right.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: The hon. member for Hamilton East (Mr. Munro) was objecting to this method. If he will look back in the records of the late 1940's, I believe there was a committee set up in connection with our national symbols, the national anthem and the flag, and nothing was ever done in connection with the recommendations of that committee. It was found to be a very difficult problem; it is a very difficult problem. If the hon. member who introduced the resolution feels that the house ought to accept, in his words, the exact resolution he has put forward, I would suggest this would not be the proper way of approaching this matter. I believe it is a matter that ought to be settled in other ways, rather than by the wording that has been put into this resolution.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the hon. member would permit me to ask him a factual question?


Gordon Harvey Aiken: Certainly.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Did the hon. gentleman look up the records with respect to the committee in 1945 and 1946? I have not done so, but my recollection is that it was concerned exclusively with the flag and had nothing whatever to do with the national anthem, which is the exclusive subject of this motion. I admit that the flag question is a difficult one, but the question of a national anthem is not difficult at all. Everybody agrees it should be "O Canada".


Some hon. Members:: Question.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: Mr. Speaker, I have a few words to say. 1 will-


Some hon. Members:: Question.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: -accept the statement of the hon. member. I have not today looked up the references to this subject. If that committee was concerned with the flag, I will accept the hon. member's statement. Regardless of that, it is the same general problem.


Mr. Cameron (High Park):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the hon. member a question?


Gordon Harvey Aiken: Yes.


Alan John Patrick Cameron: My question is this. Being somewhat interested in this subject I asked the government to answer this question: Has the government extended an invitation to the ten Canadian provinces to a consultation regarding the choice of a national flag and other national symbols? The answer I got was, no. I would ask my hon. friend to please tell me where that leaves his argument at the present time.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Up in the air.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: In the first place, Mr. Speaker, I am not responsible for the actions of the government on this and they are not responsible for what I say. At this moment I am speaking as a private member and I have a few things to say that I would like to complete, if I may; otherwise I will break my word to the hon. gentlemen, whom I assured that I was not going to talk this out. There was recently a situation in the town of Barrie, in the province of Ontario, which is, as we know, predominantly English speaking. There was a situation in the school there. I am pointing out this situation merely to show that this problem and the feeling that has been sparked with regard to a national anthem is not confined merely to one province.
This was a situation where a number of high school students wrote to the Secretary

of State (Mr. Halpenny) and asked what was the national anthem. The Secretary of State replied that there was no Canadian national anthem. I am advised that there is no country in the world, except France, which has a national anthem by statute. But in any case, this question was asked and answered. Therefore, when they were asked to stand for the national anthem, for "God Save the Queen", they said, "This is not the national anthem" and refused to stand for the singing of "God Save the Queen". This is not a problem of one province. We all want a national anthem. I am certainly in general agreement with the-


Leon David Crestohl: Yes, walk out.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: -principle-


An hon. Member:: Take "Pick" with you.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: -of a national anthem, but the wording of the resolution does make it difficult in this country. There are two versions and I am advised that the one is not a translation of the other; they are very different.
I think that, so far as this resolution is concerned, if the French version is acceptable to those who sing it in French, and the English version is acceptable to those who sing it in English, there is no reason why that should not be accomplished. It is before six o'clock, Mr. Speaker, and I am going to resume my seat. I thank all the hon. members who assisted me in this speech, because I think incorporated in the interruptions were several hon. members who did not themselves want to get up and make their own speeches.


Mr. Joseph Slogan (Springfield):: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the hon. members who have been so vociferous in asking for a vote on this resolution have left the house, I imagine that they do not want their resolution voted on and I would therefore like to say a few words. I was very happy a few minutes ago to see the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) rise and state that there certainly is no argument about what our national anthem should be. I wish he had the same idea about our national flag, because I understand he supports two or three versions of it.


Some hon. Members:: Six o'clock.


Joseph Slogan: I, like the hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Mandziuk), come from the west, where I was brought up in the tradition of singing "O Canada" at the commencement of proceedings and "God Save the Queen" at the end of proceedings. This served us very well. I personally would like to see "O Canada" adopted as our national anthem. However, there is in this resolution something that gives me some reservation about it,
Business of the House
namely, the resolution asks that we adopt the French version, which in my opinion is perhaps not as valid a national anthem as the English version. The national anthem is supposed to create unity in a country, and with references which might be considered religious-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hour for consideration of private members' business has now expired.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, before you leave the chair, if you would permit me I would like to ask the house leader whether he can tell us what the government intends to bring before us for the rest of the week, and whether it would be possible in so doing to attempt, in addition to those things that were on the menu for today, to bring forward some of the most urgent and important business for the country that the government is really anxious to get on with, such as the redistribution of seats in this house, which is a constitutional responsibility of this parliament.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is taking advantage of the opportunity to ask a question to make a speech, and he is making an attempt to give direction to the government. The government has been sustained and will carry on as it sees fit. Tomorrow we will go ahead-


Stanley Howard Knowles: Who can stop it?


Gordon Minto Churchill: That was an expression of a Grit.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Don't attack your saviour.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, the first item tomorrow will be Bill No. C-71, to amend the Farm Credit Act. The second will be the setting up of the sessional committee on railways, which is No. 27 on today's order paper. The third will be No. 15 on today's order paper, a resolution in the name of the Minister of Transport dealing with the Freight Rates Reduction Act. The fourth will be No. 10 on today's order paper, Bill No. C-58, to amend the Carriage by Air Act. The next item would be No. 11 on today's order paper, Bill No. C-59 standing in the name of the Minister of Transport, dealing with an agreement between the government of Canada and the government of the province of Ontario. On Friday we will take up the budget resolutions which were before the house the other day, and if they are finished on Friday we will carry on with any unfinished business in the group of items which I have outlined for tomorrow.


[Stage Direction]
It being three minutes after six o'clock the house adjourned, without question, put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, November 8, 1982