1963-07-04

Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Secretary of State):: Although I recognize that this is not strictly in order, perhaps I might say that after conferring with the Acting Prime Minister and one or two hon. gentlemen opposite, the government have come to the conclusion that we will not proceed tomorrow with the motion regarding sittings for Friday evening and Saturday. It appears that hon. members generally have not received enough notice and many of them have made a lot of other arrangements for the week end. I put the notice on yesterday, or I asked my hon. friend to put it on, just to protect the position, because if I had not put it on yesterday there would not have been the required 48 hours' notice. I told the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre at that time that I hoped to have some further conference before proceeding with it, but in fairness to the house I think we should not proceed with it this week. However, I hope it will be possible to proceed in this manner for the rest of the month and perhaps, after conferring with hon. gentlemen opposite, we might agree on one or two other changes in the sittings to expedite our work.

On the orders of the day:


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State in his capacity of house leader in view of the remarks he made a short time ago about the possibility of a parliamentary recess, and in view of the motion in the name of the Prime Minister in Votes and Proceedings today to lengthen the hours of sitting beginning on Friday. What is the target date that the government now has in mind for the parliamentary summer recess to begin?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I do not think that the government can be said at the moment to have a target date. I am hoping to have further discussions tomorrow, and possibly also on Monday, with hon. gentlemen who represent the other parties in the house, but these will be
contingent upon some discussions I will have with my colleagues. I hope we can give a good deal more clarification to this matter next week. I do not know whether the hon. member was in the house at the very opening of the proceedings when I announced that it was not the intention to proceed with this motion tomorrow; but it is the hope of the government that a motion which would be slightly amended will be adopted to be applicable next week end.



COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
Mr. James Forgie (Renfrew North) presented the first report of the standing committee on veterans affairs, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. Ian Grant Wahn (St. Paul's) presented the first report of the standing committee on miscellaneous private bills, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.
(Translation) :


Hon. J. P. Deschatelets (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, July 2, I sent His Worship the mayor of Montreal a letter to inform him of my intention to call a meeting in Montreal, on Saturday morning, July 6, of all parties interested in the organization of the 1967 world fair, with their respective engineers and officers.
Last night at 8.30, I received a telegram from Mayor Jean Drapeau telling me that he did not see what purpose could be served by such a meeting. I believe, on the contrary, that not only would such a meeting be useful but that it is urgent that it should take place. Therefore, today I must renew my invitation to a meeting which could be held in Montreal, Saturday, at 11 a.m.
Should the authorities of the city of Montreal find it necessary to meet earlier, it gives me pleasure to invite all parties interested in the world fair to a meeting in Ottawa tomorrow, Friday, at 2.30 p.m.

Inquiries of the Ministry
Immediately after the orders of the day, I shall get in touch with Mayor Jean Drapeau to invite him to a meeting to be held either tomorrow in Ottawa or Saturday in Montreal.
(Text):

On the orders of the day:


Hon. George C. Nowlan (Digby-Annapolis-Kings):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister. In view of the statement which was made a few moments ago by the Minister of Public Works I am not sure of the exact situation at the moment, but apparently it is proposed to hold a meeting although we are a little uncertain as to when or where. If, as and when the meeting is held will it be dealing with details in connection with the administration of the world fair, or will it be dealing with major problems which may result in further postponement of a decision in respect of the location and establishment of the fair?


Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Acting Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I think the best way to answer my hon. friend's question is to say this. An application was made for a site for the world fair which in so far as stage one was concerned was approved of by the federal government. In so far as the rest of the project was concerned, the matter was to be determined by the study of hydraulic models, and it was only on Thursday of last week that a complete report on the results of this study was given to the engineers.
In the light of that position it was thought by the minister responsible for the fair, as well as by the government, that a useful meeting could be held in Montreal of all parties concerned, that is at the municipal level, the provincial level and the federal level, together with the technical officers, to determine some of the matters that were under review and discussion in this report. I cannot add to what the minister has said because that now changes the position to some extent.
(Translation):


Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolieile-L'Assomplion-Montcalm):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a supplementary question to the Acting Prime Minister.
Since the engineers' report is favourable, is the choice of the St. Helen island site final?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I think we should wait for the answer to that question until the meeting we intend to hold is over. I prefer not to answer the question because the purpose of the meeting is to discuss the situation, and not to discuss whether the site is unacceptable; on the contrary, I feel that it is acceptable, but there are certain qualifications that the officials want to discuss.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Another supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I have put that question to the Acting Prime Minister because the Minister of Public Works said that the St. Helen island site was accepted by the federal government.


Lionel Chevrier: The Minister of Public Works was absolutely right when he said that the site was accepted and acceptable, subject to the Navigable Waters Protection Act.



TRANS-CANADA AIR LINES ACT AMENDMENT RESPECTING NAME OF COMPANY

Mr. Jean Chretien (St. Maurice-Lafleche) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-81, to amend the Trans-Canada Air Lines Act.


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to change the English name of Trans-Canada Air Lines and its French name Lignes aeriennes Trans-Canada for Air-Can-ada which is easily translated in English and French and is in accordance with international usage in the field of transport.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



TRANSPORT


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: first reading of Bill S-16, to authorize the construction and maintenance of the bridge and tunnel across the St. Lawrence river at the Boucherville islands, in the province of Quebec.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


Hon. Paul Martineau (Pontiac-Temisca-mingue):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs.
Could the minister tell the house whether it is true that the signing of an agreement

with the United States concerning the stockpiling of nuclear weapons in Canada has been delayed because of unforeseen complications and, if so, what are those complications?


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secrelary of Slale for External Affairs: Mr. Speaker, there are no complications.


Paul Raymond Martineau: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is there any delay in the signing of the agreement?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: Mr. Speaker, negotiations are under way.


Paul Raymond Martineau: What I mean is this. Are there any delays in the negotiations?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: I gave the information in my first reply to the hon. member.
(Text):



NEGOTIATIONS FOR PURCHASE OF SUBMARINES FROM UNITED KINGDOM

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Douglas Scott Harkness: should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. Can the minister inform the house as to the state of the negotiations for the acquisition of three Oberon submarines from Great Britain and, particularly, what is the reason for the delay in completing this deal? I ask this particularly in view of the fact that I initiated it over a year ago and the negotiations were, I believe, practically complete at the time I left office early in February.


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of National Defence):: As the hon. gentleman is aware, there were conditions attached to the approval which he obtained for the acquisition of the submarines at that time. As I have stated earlier, the question is presently under review and I hope an announcement can be made very shortly.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS INQUIRY AS TO POSTPONEMENT OF MUNICIPAL LOAN LEGISLATION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Heward Graffley (Brome-Missisquoi):: My question was to be directed to the Minister of Finance, but in his absence I shall direct it to the Acting Prime Minister. Can he now inform the house whether a house discussion of the municipal loan legislation has definitely been postponed as requested by Premier Lesage of Quebec?
Inquiries of the Ministry


Lionel Chevrier: Unfortunately the Minister of
Finance has left the house temporarily. I think I answered that question yesterday, and I do not know that I can add to what I said then.
(Translation):
[Later: ]


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I wish to ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. According to the newspapers-
(Text):


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I am sorry I must interrupt the hon. member but the minister has given a complete answer so far as that is concerned.
(Translation):



CANADIAN PENSION PLAN

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Remi Paul (Berlhier-Maskinonge-De-lanaudiere):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Acting Prime Minister.
Could the Acting Prime Minister inform the house whether the government intends to suspend the discussion on the resolution appearing on today's order paper under number 12 and concerning in part the transferability and the solvency of private pension plans and that, until a study has been made of the substance and of the letter of this matter by provincial and federal authorities at a conference called to take that problem into consideration?
Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Acting Prime
Minister): Mr. Speaker, while I do not think the question is in order, I shall be happy to reply by saying that yesterday, or the day before, I think, the Prime Minister received a letter on that matter from the premier of the province of Quebec and before that question can be properly answered, I think we should study that letter carefully, which we intend to do.


Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapointe):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is the Acting Prime Minister able to tell the house whether as Minister of Justice he has secured legal opinions concerning the constitutional soundness of that resolution or bill?


Lionel Chevrier: If my hon. friend would read the B.N.A. Act I believe he would find a reply to his question under section 94(a).


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question; since many sections of this act are presently being discussed, does the

Inquiries of the Ministry Minister of Justice intend to ask for a legal opinion about this specific matter?


Lionel Chevrier: For the time being, Mr. Speaker, we should consider carefully and with the utmost sympathy, as I said a moment ago, the letter from the premier of Quebec and the reply to the question put by the hon. member will depend on such consideration.



MINES AND TECHNICAL SURVEYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Acting Prime Minister a question? Can the hon. gentleman tell us whether he has now received representations from the Quebec provincial authorities in order to establish a committee to redefine the boundaries of Labrador?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I should have to enquire. Personally, I have no knowledge of any letters or inquiries from the provincial authorities. If there are, I shall report to the house.
(Text):



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. H. Aiken (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: I have a question for the Acting Prime Minister. Following the reported cabinet meeting held this morning at Harrington lake, may I first inquire on behalf of the house as to the health of the Prime Minister and, second, inquire whether any announcement may now be made concerning the sales tax.


Lionel Chevrier: I am very happy to inform the hon. gentleman, and the house as well, that the Prime Minister is in excellent health and expects to return to the house early next week.
In so far as the other part of the question is concerned, I am sure my hon. friend will realize that matters that may be under discussion at cabinet meetings are never made public.


Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Has the minister received representations from secondary industries pointing out the disastrous effect of the 11 per


cent sales tax on the newly expanding export markets for products of secondary industry? If so, has he communicated these representations to his cabinet colleagues?


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I have received representation about the 11 per cent sales tax, like many other hon. members. Most of them have been directed to the Minister of Finance. I also have received some that I have passed on.


Mr. Muir (Lisgar):: A supplementary question. Does the minister expect an across the board increase in prices as the result of a statement attributed to the president of Dominion Foundries and Steel Company as reported in today's Globe and Mail, that the stability of steel prices which has prevailed since 1957 may be upset if the 11 per cent sales tax is kept on production and maintenance materials?


Mitchell William Sharp: I think the hon. member wants an expression of my opinion. I do not think it is a proper question to put to me or that I should be expected to reply.


Mr. Speaker:: I agree.


Mr. E. Nasserden (Roslhern):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister. Could the Acting Prime Minister assure us that action will be taken to prevent an increase in the price of steel, an action that would prevent an overall increase in the costs of production?


Lionel Chevrier: As far as I know, Mr. Speaker, there is no such price control in this country. My recollection is that when a similar question was asked in the house concerning another commodity, the Prime Minister made it quite clear that there was a responsibility on another body in so far as this particular question is concerned.
(Translation):
On the orders of the day:


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Acting Prime Minister.
The Bathurst Power and Paper Company is thinking of giving up its intention of establishing a $40 million paper mill in the Gaspe peninsula, because the new 11 per cent tax would entail a supplementary expense of $3 million. Does the Acting Prime Minister plan to grant a tax exemption to that company, as unemployment is prevalent in Quebec, and more particularly in the Gaspe region?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member who has been sitting in this house for some time should know by now that, according to the rules and regulations, a question is meant to get and not to convey information. The hon. member's question is similar to the numerous questions asked in this house in the last ten days or so, and to which the Minister of Finance has already given an answer.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I rise on a point of order. My question is not out of order, and it has nation-wide implications, as the aforesaid company may decide against investing $40 million in the province of Quebec, and that would be just too bad, particularly at a moment when the unemployment situation is critical. My question raises issues of national interest affecting this country's economy.
{Text):


Mr. G. L. Chatlerton (Esquimali-Saanich):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Agriculture. On behalf of all the farmers of Canada, both east and west, would the minister use his good offices to prevail upon the Minister of Finance to withdraw the sales tax on farm building materials at the same time that he announces withdrawal of the tax on schools?



REPORTED INTENTION TO INTRODUCE BABY BUDGET

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Raymond Martineau: I have a question for the Minister of Finance. In his absence perhaps I might address it to his parliamentary secretary. Is it the minister's intention to bring in a baby budget, upon which his officials are said to be working feverishly at this time?


Mr. E. J. Benson (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance):: I would be pleased to take that question as notice.


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: May I direct a supplementary question to the Acting Prime Minister with regard to the anticipated modification of the budget. Will that statement be made at the time of day when the stock markets are open, or will it be made at eight o'clock at night as is customary in regard to budget matters?


Mr. S. J. Korchinski (Mackenzie):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance, but in his absence I will direct it to his parliamentary secretary. In view of the fact that there are rumours that a baby
Inquiries of the Ministry budget is to be presented, are there any outside advisers presently employed within the department?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. We have had quite a few questions this afternoon on this particular subject. I would remind hon. members that it was discussed during the budget debate. It was discussed, rightly or wrongly, during the supply debate, and a statement has been promised for next Monday. I know the matter is of great interest and urgency to many hon. members, to all of us in fact, but I think we should contain ourselves until Monday if it is at all possible.


Stanley James Korchinski: With respect, Mr. Speaker,
I am not seeking information on what is in the report or the budget. I am just asking whether these advisers are being employed by the department.


Mr. Speaker:: Nevertheless the form of the question is still out of order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister. In view of the hon. gentleman's view that questions should seek information, can he tell us at what time on Monday the budgetary statement of the Minister of Finance will be made?


Lionel Chevrier: I am afraid, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. member will have to hold his peace and wait until Monday for the answer.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will it be made on motions, so that spokesmen for the other parties may make their comments?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I cannot add anything to what I have already stated in my reply.



INQUIRY AS TO PAYMENT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Reynold Rapp (Humboldt-Melfori-Tis-dale):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture arising out of the meeting he had in Regina. It is understood that the major request presented by the people at the meeting was the implementation of the Liberal pre-election pledge to guarantee the price of wheat at $2-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Will the hon. member please get to his question?
1822	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry Mr. Rapp: Would the minister care to inform the house whether there was any announcement made or whether the government intends to implement this pledge?


Hon. Harry W. Hays (Minister of Agriculture):: In reply to the hon. member, this is a matter of government policy and will be dealt with later.


Mr. Nicholas Mandziuk (Marquette):: Mr. Speaker, does not the Minister of Agriculture think that the various pledges made during the election were not policy enough?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I cannot hear the question. It started out as a sort of double negative. Perhaps the hon. member could clear it up and then I could hear it.



INQUIRY AS TO INITIAL PRICE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Reynold Rapp: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. At this time of year, before the crop year ends, the wheat board usually sets a price. Would the minister be in a position to say whether the price for the next crop year, 1963-64, is going to be set very soon?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I am pretty confident that we shall be able to announce the initial prices this year much earlier than they were announced last year, which was on August 6.
(Translation):



DEFENCE PRODUCTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Real Caouetie (Villeneuve):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister.
Could he tell us if it is true that the building of eight frigates at the Lauzon shipyards-a contract worth $374 million- has been cancelled by the government?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware that such a project has been cancelled. I am not even aware that such a project has been announced but, in any event, I will take this question as notice, and it might be possible to answer it at some other time.


(Text):



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Edward Nasserden: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a supplementary question to the Acting Prime Minister. The Minister of Agriculture is reported to have indicated at Regina that the government is about ready to reveal a bold new agricultural policy for Canada. Could the Acting Prime Minister indicate when this policy may be announced?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend should know that policies of the government are announced from time to time, and this one will be announced in due course.



SUNFLOWER SEED


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Robson Muir: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Is the minister now in a position to announce the support price for sunflower seed for the 1963-64 crop season?


Harry William Hays: This will be done in the next few days.



PENSIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I hope I may have a chance later to put to the Minister of Finance the question I rose to ask of him a little time ago. While on my feet may I address a supplementary to the Acting Prime Minister with respect to a question asked regarding the legislation forecasting a Canada pension plan. In view of the fact that this legislation was a firm commitment of the Liberal party to the Canadian people, can we be assured that it will be proceeded with at this session?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I do not think I can add anything to what the Minister of National Health and Welfare has replied. I think she has replied once, if not twice, to this question, and I do not think I should add anything further.


Stanley Howard Knowles: In view of the fact that the answer by the Minister of National Health and Welfare was just that I should wait and see, may I get an assurance from the Acting Prime Minister that if there is to be any delay regarding this legislation then the increase in the old age security pension of $10 a month will be separated from the rest of the legislation and proceeded with, so that people can get this increase?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, the resolution is on the order paper. It speaks for itself, and I presume that in due course it will be proceeded with.
(Translation):



CANADIAN CENTENNIAL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Marcel Lessard (Lake St. John):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister. Could he inform the house of the progress made by the committee for Canada's centennial.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, the question asked by the hon. member is not urgent, since the house already knows that the committee has been established and that it is at work. I cannot give a detailed report for the moment; however, such a report will be submitted in due course either when we consider the estimates or at some other time. But I have to say again that the question is not urgent.
(Text):


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Perhaps the hon. member would put that question on the order paper.



TARIFF BOARD RULING ON IMPORTS OF EDIBLE OILS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Danforih (Kent, Onl.):: I
should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Can the minister inform the house whether the tariff board has as yet given its ruling on submissions of the Ontario soya bean growers association and other interested parties with regard to the increase in Canadian tariffs on imports of edible oils? If the answer is no, can the minister indicate when he might be in a position to give the house this report?


Mr. Speaker:: May I ask the hon. member to put that question on the order paper?



INQUIRY AS TO GRAIN SALES TO EAST GERMANY AND RED CHINA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jack McIntosh (Swift Current-Maple
Creek): Mr. Speaker, yesterday I directed a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce in regard to anticipated grain sales to East Germany. The minister said he would take my question as notice and comment later. I wonder whether he would also comment on articles appearing in United States newspapers to the effect that the delegation he sent to China has returned empty handed.
Inquiries of the Ministry
['Mr. Speaker, the matter to which my hon. friend directs our attention is now a matter of discussion between the two governments.\n(Translation):']
Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, when the hon. gentleman asked me his question yesterday about the negotiations for credit sales of grain to East Germany, I asked the wheat board to give me a report as soon as possible.
I am sorry, but it has not yet been received.
I am quite unaware of the reports which have appeared in United States newspapers. Perhaps I should explain this. The delegation headed by the secretary of the Canadian wheat board was in Hong Kong for a period of some days, returned and made a report. On the basis of that report Mr. McNamara arrived in Hong Kong at the beginning of this week. So far as I know he is still there, working very actively on the negotiations.


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquillam):: have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. May I ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce how soon he expects to be able to make an announcement regarding the wheat deal with mainland China?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I think my anxiety is the same as the hon. gentleman's. I hope, as soon as possible.


Stanley James Korchinski: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. In view of statements that negotiations are presently under way with Czechoslovakia in connection with the sale of grain, are the officials of his department still actively engaged in the sale of grain or has the responsibility been transferred entirely to the Department of Trade and Commerce?


Harry William Hays: Mr. Speaker, in reply to the hon. gentleman's question concerning the Department of Trade and Commerce, I think the wheat board has had this responsibility all along, and still has.



[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Colin Cameron (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands):: I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. In view of the reported reluctance of the United States government to sign a nonaggression treaty with the Warsaw pact nations as part of a nuclear test ban agreement, can the minister tell us if the Canadian government shares this reluctance and, if not, whether he has conveyed to our NATO allies Canada's willingness to sign such a nonaggression pact?
1824	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of State for External Affairs): The hon. gentleman will recall the reply I made yesterday to a question, not altogether different from this, which was put to me by his leader, the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam. The hon. gentleman who has just asked this question is aware that some time ago the United Kingdom and the United States proposed a test ban in the atmosphere, in outer space, and under water.
The proposal made by Mr. Khrushchev does not indicate whether a test ban is to be complete or merely partial.
Whether or not the arrangements, which he proposes with regard to a non-aggression pact, should be treated as part of a package deal is a matter that may be discussed by the parties who will be attending the conference in Moscow on July 15. As I indicated yesterday, the attitude of the Canadian government has been transmitted to the allied powers.


Colin Cameron: Can the minister tell us if this government would regard the inclusion of a nonaggression pact as an insuperable obstacle to this signing of a test ban agreement?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: I think if the hon. gentleman will do me the honour of reading what I said yesterday he will find that I made a fairly complete reply.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, might I direct a question either to the Acting Prime Minister or to the Secretary of State for External Affairs, and inquire what arrangements are being made for the revival and the next meeting of the Canada-U.S. parliamentary committee?


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secretary of Stale for External Affairs: Mr. Speaker, the matter to which my hon. friend directs our attention is now a matter of discussion between the two governments.
(Translation):



PAKISTAN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Rémi Paul: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Could the minister inform the house of the consequences of the serious attack which was made on the 35 Canadian students who are visiting the capital of Pakistan at present and can he tell the families of those students what security meas-(Mr. Cameron (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands).]

ures are being taken to protect those youths during their six-week stay in Pakistan?


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secretary of Stale for External Affairs: Mr. Speaker, I have no information at present, but I hope I will be in a position to give a reply tomorrow.
(Text):



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. Russell MacEwan (Piclou):: I have a question for the Minister of Transport. It concerns a matter which I brought to his attention earlier and with regard to which I had a reply on May 27. But it is a continuing problem; therefore I think it is one which should be raised on orders of the day. In view of the continuing unemployment situation at Eastern Car Company, Trenton, Nova Scotia, the largest employer in the area, would the minister check with Canadian National Railways regarding the possibility of providing a substantial railway car order for that plant at least for the coming winter months?


Hon. G. J. Mcllrailh (Minister of Transport):: I would be glad to take this question as notice and look into the matter.



REDISTRIBUTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. J. Moreau (York-Scarborough):: should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State. I was wondering if the minister can inform the house whether we may expect legislation this session to set up a commission to redraw our electoral boundaries.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. member for York-Scarborough represents, I believe, the most populous constituency in this country, and I think he represents it very well indeed. At the same time I can understand his concern about the problem of redistribution, which I think is shared by every member in this house.
The government has been giving the most urgent consideration to the legislation which will be required and, as indicated in the speech from the throne, it proposes to recommend proceeding by way of an independent non-partisan body for the purpose. I hope the legislation can be put on the order paper before we think of having a recess. It is not the thought of the government that it would be proceeded with, if there is a summer recess, until after the recess.

If you would permit me, Mr. Speaker, and if the house would permit me, because of the great interest in this subject I would like to add one other word. The chief electoral officer has been charged by the government in the name of the house, and I am sure with the approval of everyone here, with the responsibility of having statistics collected and maps prepared and other action taken that anyone could foresee would be required for the functioning of a commission, so that the time between now and the setting up of the commission will not be lost and the commission can get to work at once once the house has set it up.


George Clyde Nowlan: A supplementary question to the Secretary of State. Even allowing for all the work which I know has been and is being done by the chief electoral officer, is it not correct that a very substantial period of time will elapse from the time the commission is set up until a report can be brought forward to the house and finally implemented by legislation?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think that is probably true. I had been thinking of recommending to my colleagues-and perhaps they would feel I am going rather far in recommending to the whole house, but this is a matter for the whole house, not for one party or another- that I arrange for an interparty meeting with the chief electoral officer at which he could give us a report on his very interesting visit to Australia, on which he has reported to me, which I think would bring the whole problem more closely before all of us. If that is the wish of the house I will consult with the hon. gentlemen with whom I usually consult about these matters with a view to seeing whether something of that sort can be arranged.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Raymond Langlois (Meganlic):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I directed a question to the Minister of Labour and the answer given was that the subject matter was not under his jurisdiction so he could not take action. I should like today to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Would the hon. lady tell the house if she will send financial help to the miners of Solbec copper mine in Quebec who have been on strike since March 1, 1963?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, I will have to take that question as notice.
28902-5-116
4,	1963	1825
Inquiries of the Ministry BROADCASTING



REQUEST FOR PROGRESS REPORT ON WORK OF INQUIRY COMMISSION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Secretary of State when he will be able to give us a progress report from the three man commission of inquiry appointed to review the problems facing broadcasting, particularly with regard to any recommendations relating to community antenna or wiring systems.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I do not think that the three gentlemen who are conferring at my request would expect to be dignified by the title of commission. They have no commission. It was merely a request which I made to them in their individual capacities, because of their individual competence, to provide me with some advice which I could share with my colleagues with a view to seeing what further inquiries of a more formal nature, if any, might be necessary in the field of broadcasting. I am not sure whether the kind of communication or report which they will make to me will be of the sort that would be of any real advantage to communicate to the house-not, in my view, that there will be anything secret at all. But when the report is received, if it is of the kind which I think would be advantageous I would certainly be glad to make it public in the house. I have had one or two progress reports about the talks, but I would anticipate that these talks would not be completed before perhaps early September, partly because the president of the C.B.C. has certain international commitments which he is now carrying out outside the country.


Douglas Mason Fisher: A supplementary question.
Could the minister indicate whether he can proceed, and intends to proceed, with legislation regarding community antenna systems, or does he have to wait till he receives advice from this commission or committee?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not know that that particular question was one of those which were specifically remitted to these gentlemen. It is a very difficult question and I can understand, and I think to some degree share, the concern felt by the hon. member and many other hon. members about this particular problem. Its legal and constitutional aspects are being studied, as well as its practical aspects, and as soon as I have anything I can usefully communicate to the house I will be only too glad to do so.

Inquiries of the Ministry VETERANS AFFAIRS



SUNNYBROOK HOSPITAL, TORONTO    PARTIAL USE AS GENERAL HOSPITAL

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Ralph Cowan (York-Humber):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Veterans Affairs. In part III of the Glassco report, dealing with medical care and hospitalization of special groups, the recommendation is made on page 195:
That active treatment hospitals now operated by the Department of Veterans Affairs, when cleared, be sold and converted into community hospitals.
Yesterday the Calvin committee report on active treatment hospitals in metropolitan Toronto-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Ralph Bronson Cowan: -emphasized that "metro Toronto is short 2,360 active treatment beds"-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Would the hon. member give the house the question, please.


Ralph Bronson Cowan: Is the Department of Veterans Affairs giving active consideration to converting part of Sunnybrook military hospital into a general hospital, as recommended by the Glassco report and as has been proven necessary by the Calvin committee report?


Hon. Roger Teillei (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, with regard to that question I can only reply as I have to other questions of this kind in the house. To say specifically that this item is under active discussion by itself would not be accurate. The entire question, as I have stated before, is under active consideration, and we do hope we can come up with some conclusions before too long, although by "before too long" I do not mean a matter of some two or three weeks. I do want to underline as I have before, because this is very important, that the consideration in all these things will be the interests and rights of the veterans and of the staff of these hospitals. These interests will be a paramount consideration.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a question of the Secretary of State. This week we received the annual report in French and English of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. Is it the intention of the minister to amend the law to provide for the translation of this title into French?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I have no constitutional responsibility for Atomic Energy of Canada
[Mr. Pickersgill.)

Limited; and I think the question might more properly be taken as notice, because it does not appear to me to be of prime urgency, by the minister responsible.



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Friday, June 28, consideration in committee of Bill No. C-74, respecting the department of industry-the Prime Minister-Mr. Batten in the chair.
The Deputy Chairman:: Order. The house again in committee of the whole on Bill No. C-74, respecting the department of industry. The committee is now considering clause 5. Shall clause 5 carry?
On clause 5-Temporary appointments. (Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the hon. minister a question. Can he give us some idea of the salary of the experts who are going to be brought in by the minister?


Mr. Drury:: Mr. Chairman, to reply briefly, "what they are worth".


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Will the salaries vary between a minimum of $5,000 and a maximum of $15,000?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, no minimum nor maximum salary has been established. It depends entirely on the required services. Indeed, there are some experts who are very expensive and some less.


Mr. Ricard:: Mr. Chairman, can the minister tell us whether the experts whose services will be retained will be chosen by the minister, or whether they will have to submit to an examination comprising a series of questions or whether they will have to take part in a competition under the civil service commission?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, we shall, first of all, try to recruit those experts in the existing civil service, and it is only when the required talent cannot be found among federal employees that outsiders will be brought in.
Anyway, they may be appointed either by passing competitive examinations organized by the civil service commission, or by means of a contract submitted to the governor in council because of the limited time available. Briefly, if they cannot be found in the present civil service staff, their appointment will be made by a contract which will be submitted to the governor in council.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Chairman, the hon. minister just stated that they would only be

recruited elsewhere if and when the required qualifications are not found in the public service.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Yes, Mr. Chairman.


Paul Raymond Martineau: In this case, who is going to determine if qualified employees are to be found within the civil service or not?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Applications will be submitted to the civil service commission, Mr. Chairman.
(Text):


Mr. Starr:: I should like to ask the minister a question. I have read in the newspapers recently that in the establishment of this department, branches will be set up across Canada in various municipalities. How many branches does the minister anticipate setting up at once and eventually, and what will be the total personnel of the department now and eventually?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: The number of branches or regional offices as they are described cannot be determined theoretically in advance. We will have to discover as we go along how many are required. The areas in which they will be required will be determined somewhat by the program that may be evolved on behalf of the federal government to provide aid to manufacturing industry, and these regional offices should be located in relation to the regions in which they may be of the most help. Until such time as the department has been created, has analysed the problems and has proposed solutions and had them accepted it is difficult to say with any degree of precision exactly where they are going to work. I am afraid the same applies to the total number of people in these offices.


Michael Starr: Does the minister have any idea what the total cost to the taxpayers will be for this department in order for it to function properly when it is eventually set up?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I have had no estimate made,
I regret to say, of the eventual cost. I do not think anyone could make one at this juncture.


Edward Nasserden: Could the minister indicate whether it is anticipated that some of these people will be working for a dollar a year plus their pension premiums while still remaining on the payrolls of their companies?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: It is possible that amongst the group who will be assisting for a relatively short time in the organization phase of the department there will be what are generally known as dollar a year men. As I think hon. members will appreciate, it is difficult to have a man completely sever his connections with his current job for so short a period as 28902-5-116J
4,	1963	1327
Establishment of Industry Department four or five months, let us say. In so far as his functions as described in clause 5 are concerned, they will be related to the organization of the department rather than the framing or development over a long period of time of government policy, so perhaps some of the worries which the hon. member may have in mind may not arise.


Edward Nasserden: I am not too worried about what I think the minister thinks I was worried about, but this clause seems to be designed in such a way as to anticipate that a number of people who fit into this particular category will be taken on at the beginning.


Mr. Howe (Wellinglon-Huron):: Mr. Chairman, the minister has just indicated that there may be a long period of development, and I am rather surprised that under subclause 2 of clause 5 there is a time limit on the employment of these people.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: The purpose of including a terminal date for this arrangement was an implicit recognition of the fact that in the government departments one should look to the regular apparatus of the civil service commission to recruit and train those civil servants who are needed to operate within the federal government framework. Consequently it was felt that while it might be necessary to seek outside people to assist in the organization phase, such type of employment should not continue beyond the initial organizing period, and the department would expect that by December 31, 1964 the civil service commission would be in a position to recruit and train under regular civil service procedures those who are going to staff the department.


William Marvin Howe: Supplementary to the question asked by the hon. member for Ontario, how many people does the minister figure are going to be trained by the civil service commission to carry on the department after December 31, 1964?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: The number to be trained by the civil service commission subsequent to that time will depend on the evolution of the department, and in the same way that I was unable to answer precisely as to the eventual number of regional offices, it is difficult at this time, before the department is even authorized, to give a precise figure as to the ultimate number of employees.


Mr. Churchill:: Mr. Chairman, I confess to astonishment at an earlier statement by the minister, who is piloting this bill through the house, that people from outside have to be called in to instruct the government and a competent civil service as to how to set up
1828	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department a department. He said these people would not be engaged in the long term development of policy but would be brought in in order to organize the department. We have 20 departments in the government service and the experience of generations in setting up departments, new ones having been formed from time to time. What in the world has happened now to make the government consider that they must bring in outsiders? I thought they had had their fingers burned sufficiently already with outsiders. Why must they bring in outsiders in order to do a job that the civil service is competent to do and has been doing over the years? This is a most astonishing development indeed.
The minister mentioned that they would be something like the dollar a year men that we had during wartime when most Canadians were serving for $1.30 a day. But this is not wartime. There is not the same tremendous rush to get something done because survival is at stake. Under wartime conditions it was understandable that additional help was required, but here we have this fantastic notion originating, I think, with the Minister of Finance, who is 20 years out of date when he relies on something in which he participated in 1939 or 1940 or around that time.
This is another example of the brushing aside of a competent civil service by suggesting that our civil service, with a score of trained and experienced deputy ministers as well as assistant deputy ministers, is not able to advise the government on how to set up a department, and that outsiders have to be called in because the government has no confidence in and does not trust the civil service. I think this again is a provision that has been carelessly drawn. The problem has not been thought out.
Clause 5 dealing with temporary appointments gives emphasis to what we have been saying about the bill generally, that it has been hastily conceived, badly drafted and is aimed at performing a function which is already being performed by the Department of Trade and Commerce. I was hoping that the Minister of Trade and Commerce would be here to stand up in the house and say those things that I suggested he would have to say with regard to the setting up of this new department, which cuts the heart out of his department. However, he is absent on other business.
I do point out, Mr. Chairman, that this is a ridiculous extra expense being placed upon the shoulders of the taxpayers of this country. It is going to add to the deficit of the Minister of Finance at a time when he is losing his revenue sources with each withdrawal of his propositions. This is an unnecessary additional expense because these


people are going to be brought in-we do not know how many-and they are going to be paid such salaries, upon such terms and conditions as the governor in council sees fit. This may mean expense allowances. They will be doing jobs for which trained people are already available within the civil service.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Perhaps I misled the hon. member who has just spoken in suggesting that these people were to be brought in for the purpose of organizing the department. What I should have said more properly was to assist in the work of the department during the organizational phase. I did, I think, place emphasis on the fact the people who would be brought in would provide the skills which are not now to be found within the civil service. An endeavour will be made by the civil service commission, and certainly by myself, to staff to the fullest extent possible right from the day this department is authorized with those men who are now in the public service of Canada, for which all of us have the highest regard. It will only be in the event that special or specialized talents are needed and cannot be found that outside people will be sought under the provisions of clause 5.


Mr. Kindt:: Do I understand the minister to say that the personnel will be taken on for organization purposes and, I assume, for certain staff purposes, and at a later time in the development of the department they will be blanketed into the civil service? Is that the intention of the minister?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I thought I explained that they were to assist in carrying out the work of the department during the organizational phase, and not longer than December, 1964. I am not too clear what the hon. member implied by his question, will they be blanketed into the civil service? This has a slightly sinister ring about it. These men will have to qualify for civil service employment like anybody else or they will terminate their relationships under this clause at the end of December, 1964.


Mr.   Kindi@: May I ask a supplementary question. Then that would provide an opportunity to bring into the civil service all the party supporters of the Liberal party and, at a later time, blanket them into the civil service. Let us make no mistake about that. The minister cannot put one across and tell us this means anything different from what I have just indicated.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: As the hon. member knows, one is not supposed to impugn the motives of any other hon. member. 1 think I would let the question die there.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I wonder if the minister could indicate to us what are the particular skills which the people who are to be brought in will possess and which are not possessed by the people in the Department of Trade and Commerce, defence production or other departments which are at present carrying on more or less the activities of this new department? I am wondering particularly if the minister could indicate to us how many people of this nature it is his intention to bring in for the organizational set-up of the department.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: In response to the last part of the question, I am unable to say how many because there has not been, as yet, any attempt to recruit people or even to canvass within the civil service. Perhaps it would be inappropriate to do so before the department is authorized.
By way of example of the special skills, I think there are within government service at present a number of people who are intimately acquainted with the aircraft industry, with the shipbuilding industry and, within the Department of Defence Production, with the machine tool industry. There are not, in either the Department of Defence Production or in the present Department of Trade and Commerce, men with an intimate knowledge of and experience in the basic steel industry of Canada. If we can find such a man within the civil service he will be taken into this department. If not it may be necessary, during this initial period, to look to someone in that field to give us a start.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Has the minister any other examples he could give of the particular skills that will be looked for in addition to skill in the basic steel industry? I would think that perhaps the department of mines might have somebody with a considerable amount of knowledge in that area.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: This would be a source to be canvassed, I agree. As I explained to the hon. member, this canvass has not yet been made. It would be premature for me to provide answers to questions which have not yet been looked at.


Douglas Scott Harkness: It would seem to me that if the government has no idea of the number of people to whom this section would apply, and has very little idea of the special skills that would be required, it is rather a questionable section to include in the bill.


Raymond Langlois: I should like to ask the minister if he has any other technicians in mind in addition to the steel industry. I am thinking, for example, of the asbestos industry, which provides a great deal of revenue for
Establishment of Industry Department the country but which is concerned mainly with the basic material. There is not much finishing in Canada. Does the minister foresee any industries being established in that area?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I would sincerely hope that there could be developed in Canada intensive processing to a much greater degree than is the case at present, of the output of the asbestos mines themselves. This is a mineral which is partially unique to Canada and we should clearly go a lot farther than we do in the processing of it. This will be one of the functions of this department.


William Marvin Howe: I was just interested, in connection with this new processing about which we are talking, in ascertaining whether the government intends to seek these experts within Canada, or are they going to be brought in from other countries to advise our people in the department of industry?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I think that in relation to Canadian industry we probably can find amongst Canadians in Canada the kind of help that is needed. It should not be necessary to go outside.


Mr. Douceli:: I should like to ask the minister a question in connection with clause 5, which says that no person appointed under subsection 1 shall continue his employment after December 31, 1964. Is it definitely decided that this department will be so set up that no advice will be needed after that date?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Specialized advice after that date will be needed. There is no doubt about it. To assume that this department will have all the knowledge and all the skills required is, as I mentioned earlier, presumptuous. The provision of specialized advice on an ad hoc, or even on a continuing, basis is provided for by clause 15, which we will come to later. Clause 5, which is under discussion now, deals with the temporary manning of the department until December 31, 1964.


Mr. Smith:: The minister does not seem to be very certain what kind of personnel he is going to need in his department. My riding is a typical secondary manufacturing industrial riding. In fact the dominion government impinges on the affairs of manufacturers there in five areas, namely tariffs, taxes, export policy, the industrial development bank and shipbuilding. There are experts on shipbuilding in the Department of Defence Production, some of whom deal particularly with tariffs, which is the big worry of many people in my riding. There are lots of experts in both finance and national revenue, and on taxation
1830	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department there are experts in the same two departments. We have experts on export policy, and loan experts in the industrial development bank. What my manufacturers want are not more experts telling them what to do, but policies that will increase their businesses and give them a chance to survive.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Chairman, during my
absence I gather that the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre has been making some suggestions that I, as Minister of Trade and Commerce, was unsympathetic with the objectives of this legislation, and that I might be concerned about the weakening of my department. I would like to assure the hon. gentleman that during the time I was in private life I was one of the first private citizens to advocate the formation of a department of industry, and I did that with full knowledge of the responsibilities of the Department of Trade and Commerce of which I had been deputy minister at one time.
I believe it is essential for the period ahead that there be centralized, in the department of industry, the administration concerned with industrial development in Canada. I believe that this will add greatly to the efficiency of the government, and that it will leave the Minister of Trade and Commerce more time to devote to his primary functions, which are the promotion of trade.
May I add, Mr. Chairman, that the Department of Trade and Commerce became involved in industrial development because of its offices abroad. These offices were receiving inquiries about the possibility of establishing industrial plants in Canada. So, in order to service those inquiries, it became necessary to establish an office in the Department of Trade and Commerce to which they could be directed.
I believe we have gone far beyond this point in the needs of the country for industrial development, and I consider that now there ought to be a department primarily concerned with industrial development, rather than trying to divide the interests of the Minister of Trade and Commerce among industrial development, trade promotion and trade policy which are his primary functions.


Mr.   Kindi@: Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Defence Production has previously informed the house that he has made no personal study, nor is he in a position to give any estimate on the cost of personnel in setting up this organization. This sounds bad; not only does it sound bad but it is bad. He is virtually asking this house to give him a blank cheque to hire people, without in turn giving the house any idea what the estimated costs will be. We have no target to shoot at and no facts on
[Mr. Smith.!

which to discuss this particular topic; therefore I think it should be deleted.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: In the statement which he just made the minister used the word "centralized". We are afraid of that on this side of the house because the provinces do not like this word very much. I would like to know what the minister means by this word, because I think there is a danger of infringing on provincial rights.


Mitchell William Sharp: I was of course talking about centralization of functions within the Canadian government. I was not talking about centralization within Canada. I was talking about the importance of efficiency within the Canadian government service, and that there ought to be located in one place all those functions relating to industrial development. I was not straying beyond this very limited meaning of the word.


George Clyde Nowlan: I do not want to ask the minister to answer too many questions right away. I know the difficulties involved, and sometimes it is better to proceed and deal with them all at one time. However clause 5 says-
-the governor in council may appoint persons-
-and so on, while clause 15 says-
-the governor in council may appoint advisers-
-and so on. I presume any person who is an adviser is an advisory person, and it seems to us on this side of the house that there is a complete duplication except that clause 5 says "having special knowledge." Clause 15 permits the minister to appoint anyone even without special or general knowledge, and I suggest there is complete duplication between the two clauses. I am not asking the minister which should be deleted. I think he should have the general power under clause 15, and that he should be prepared to withdraw clause 5 which is clearly a duplication of it.


William Marvin Howe: Further to the question asked by the hon. member for Macleod, I would like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce, who made reference to his experience in that department, whether he might have an idea how many and what type of personnel will be required?


George Clyde Nowlan: If I can facilitate matters, perhaps the minister would be prepared to hold clause 5 in view of the questions which have been raised. We can hold that clause for a moment and then come back to it later when we reach clause 15.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I had hoped I made the distinction between clause 5 and clause 15. Clause 15 is a general continuing authority

for the appointment of advisers to the ministry and is really a standard feature in all bills. Clause 5, however, relates to temporary arrangements, in effect to provide for a lack of working personnel during the organizational phases of the department, and to enable the department to become effective at an earlier date than if we were to wait for the normal processes of recruitment and training by the civil service commission. It is a clause which sets out this purpose, and it is self determining. It will cease to have any force or effect after December 31, 1964, and the purpose of including it in here was to make it quite clear it was the intention of the government to proceed in this unusual fashion for a temporary, relatively short period.
I do not want to get ourselves dug in on this clause, which could easily happen and which would be somewhat unfortunate because there are other clauses which are much more important. We have raised this question with respect to clause 15, a clause which makes provision for appointments to be made by the governor in council in exactly the same way as clause 5 does. 1 was hoping we could proceed further with the bill and give consideration to these two clauses when we come to clause 15. Certainly, if we have a general power to appoint by order in council, as we have in clause 15, we do not need the powers in clause five. I do not know how many members will wish to discuss this point. There may be some. I was hoping to make progress. I made a suggestion. If the minister does not see fit to accept it, it may be that clause five will not go through and that it will be held up for some time. I do not know.


Mr. Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria):: I want to say one word on this. The minister was talking about these experts who would be brought in. I realize it may be difficult for him to say how many may be required, but presumably some estimate has been made. Is it 10, or 50, or 500? Can he give the committee a general idea?
I have in mind another matter. Would the minister be bringing in, for example, any expert or experts on the coal mining industry which is so important to both eastern and western Canada? If so, what will become of the dominion coal board? What would its functions be? Would it carry on in conjunction with these experts or would it eventually be eliminated? The coal board, to my mind, has done and is still doing a good job and I hate, frankly, especially in view of recent events, to think what might happen to the coal industry if the whiz kids really get hold of it.
4, 1963	1831
Establishment of Industry Department


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I agree with the hon. member that the dominion coal board has been doing a first class job in relation to the coal industry in Canada. I can assure him it would not be the purpose of this department to endeavour to duplicate the functions of any other agency of the government or to arrogate to itself the functions which they are satisfactorily performing. If, for example, in relation to the coal mining industry any men were required, it would largely be for the purpose of affecting liaison between the coal board and the general apparatus of the department in relation to other industries-to make a bridge between the coal mining industry in Canada and possible coal consuming industries.


Mr. Peters:: The minister has given us a statement telling us the purpose for which these people are to be employed. Has he considered that some of these advisers may prove to be of continuing value to the department and that the bill might have to be amended so as to allow such people to be retained automatically, in the civil service?
It seems to me that it is not desirable to have in the new department a conglomeration of people from other departments who had proved ineffective. It may be we shall need people from outside the country altogether. It is possible that countries such as West Germany, where remarkable industrial progress has lately been made, would agree to come here and participate in the development of industry in Canada. Subsequently it might prove that it was not to our advantage to let them go automatically because of the provisions which are at present in clause 2. I raise this question because it relates to one which I brought to the attention of our members the other night when I suggested that Dave Golden would be an excellent deputy minister. Someone has told me this was going to be a fact, and I would be curious to hear from the minister whether consideration has, indeed, been given to this suggestion.
Those who are chosen to join the staff of the new department will be valued more for the new ideas they are capable of bringing than, say, in terms of direct assistance to industry. A great many of our industries do not need assistance of a direct kind. The shipbuilding industry, for example, does not need people to give it advice. The companies are already in existence; they are extremely capable and all they need is an opportunity of producing. Their ability is proven. The aircraft industry, to mention another example, has already proven its capability. I think that is true of many other branches of industry. What are needed are new ideas. We are often surprised to read in
1832	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department newspapers and periodicals about industrial developments which are taking place in countries abroad, particularly in Europe. We read from time to time about new processes which, so far, have not been tried here.
As I have suggested, the people whom we should recruit are those who would be capable of throwing a new light on our industrial processes, and these people should have an opportunity to become permanent officials of the department. The minister would be well advised to bring in people from as wide a sphere as possible. There are many ways in which they could use their talents. For example, there is a terrific potential- for something-in northern Ontario. We have chewed up the rocks for years in the course of mining operations, but nobody seems to know quite what can be done with this residue, although some research has been done in connection with the possibility of making use of this material. Possibly, building brick, opaque plaques, or other useful material could be produced from it. People who can devise ways of developing these raw materials profitably are the ones who should be retained. If the provision now before us means that their services can continue to be used in the department, I am in favour of it. If not, I think the clause should be given further consideration.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I think the hon. gentleman has proposed two alternatives in relation to clause 5; either that we have no interest in affairs beyond December 1964, which is manifestly incorrect, or that after that date it would be expected that those who remain in the civil service would qualify under the civil service regulations. We will continue to have an interest in these people, and after that date people joining the department and remaining in the department should be prepared to and be able to qualify under civil service regulations. By that time they should be ready to qualify.


Mr. Olson:: Mr. Chairman, I wanted to make one or two comments while the Minister of Trade and Commerce was still here because he made one or two rather interesting statements, one of them being that the thought it was desirable to set up a department of industry so that the Department of Trade and Commerce or the Minister of Trade and Commerce could have an undivided interest and could pursue the matter of developing trade. Doing a little rapid calculation, if I may call it that, I take it that the minister of this new department will be fairly busy and that there will be a rather profound division of interests. If the argument of the Minister of Trade and Commerce is valid for his department, I think it is even more valid in this


case. Because if I understand it correctly, the new minister will be in charge of regional industrial development. He is going to be in charge of industrial research; whether this includes the national research council or whether there is to be more specialized industrial research remains to be seen. Yesterday we had the announcement that he would also be in charge of emergency measures organization and assume all responsibility and functions previously handled by three different departments. He is also going to be the minister of automation, if I may call it that, because he will be charged with dealing with all the problems which arise because of automation. It does not necessarily spell out that this will also include the impact on the labour force, but we must certainly draw the inference from the provisions of the bill that he will be charged with the responsibility of automation as it applies to the industrial and perhaps the management side. In addition to that he is to be in charge of defence production and all that that involves.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I suggest that the reason given by the Minister of Trade and Commerce that he should not have his interests divided between trade and industry are even more valid in this case because, as I pointed out the other day, there seems to be a somewhat greater division of interest in all the things which are going to be assigned to the minister of this department than the two areas which seem to be so complementary to each other, namely trade and industry. I should like to have the minister reconcile this statement with what the government is actually doing in loading up the new minister with all these responsibilities. I will have something further to say on the next clause, because there is some question of jurisdiction which is to be included in this department. It seems to me a fairly complex situation.
While I am on my feet I should like to say a word or two about some of the provisions in the Glassco commission report which was discussed the other day. If the minister is going to do all the things which are apparently to be loaded upon him he will need more personnel, including personnel from almost all departments in the government today. I should like the minister to suggest whether the new minister can handle all these things without that division of interest which the Minister of Trade and Commerce indicates was undesirable.


Lawrence Elliott Kindt: Mr. Chairman, in the interests of making progress and trying to be of help to the minister, would he mind holding clause 5 for discussion with clause 15 and let us get on with other clauses in the bill? Would

he mind temporarily holding this clause until we can discuss clause 5 and clause 15 together? If he would agree to that we can get on with the work of the committee.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, I have tried to make the point that clause 5 and clause 15 cover two quite different situations. Clause 5 relates to the problem of rapid staffing with persons having special skill, who cannot be found within the civil service up to December 31, 1964. Clause 15 provides for the obtaining by the government of advice from outsiders, who are outsiders and will continue to be outsiders. They will not form part of the staff of the department nor be employees of the department. Clause 5 relates to individuals who would be temporary employees of the department rather than merely advisers. In this sense clause 5 is different from clause 15, and also for that reason is placed in a different position in the bill. It follows the principal disposition regarding staff, namely clause 4, the deputy minister provision. There is this distinction; and to ask the committee to postpone this clause until some later date merely means the resumption of the discussion, I would suggest, that we are now having without any greater degree of enlightenment.


Mr. Dinsdale:: Mr. Chairman, a short time ago the minister indicated the hope that many of these temporary employees might qualify for the civil service, following their one year's service. Would that qualification be based on their one year's service on a temporary basis or would they qualify in the normal way?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: The normal way.


Mr. Flemming (Victoria-Carleton):: Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask the minister, since he has given the committee the assurance that the intention is that the civil service will be used, why the words "civil service commission" do not appear in clause 5 or in clause 15?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Because the civil service and clause 15 do not come together at all.


Hugh John Flemming: My point is this. Who has a better knowledge than the civil service commission about the qualifications of persons presently employed in the civil service? In addition to that, who has a better knowledge of the qualifications of the people whom they are examining day after day and who, for one reason or another, may not qualify for the position being considered at the moment? Having that knowledge at the disposal of the civil service commission, it seems to me something which should be incorporated in the clause.
28902-5-117
4. 1963	1833
Establishment of Industry Department


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I mentioned just before the hon. gentleman came in that advice would be sought of the civil service commission as to the availability within the present government service of the kind of person being sought, and it would be in light of the inability of the civil service commission to furnish from within the public service of Canada at that moment the kind of person sought that recourse would be had to this clause. I do not think I will yield to anybody in my high regard for the present public service of Canada, and my strong view is that continuous recourse should be had to the public service before looking elsewhere. This is, in a sense, a residual clause. In the absence of the ability of the civil service commission to find, from within the government service, the kind of persons sought, then recourse would be had to this clause, but not for longer than the period mentioned.


Sydney John Smith: Mr. Chairman, will the minister assure us that persons employed under clause 5 will not be paid at a higher rate of salary than persons within the civil service, for comparative jobs?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I do not think it is possible to give that assurance, Mr. Chairman. Obviously, if you are going to get a man away from his business for a period of four months, it is probable that you are going to have to pay him a monthly salary which is higher than one would expect to pay a man who was engaging in the same job as part of a life's career.


Sydney John Smith: Then if he was a very valuable employee and you wanted to keep him on after December 31, 1964, you would have to ask him to take a reduction in pay to stay on in the civil service?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: That is correct.


Edward Nasserden: Mr. Chairman, listening to the answers the minister has been giving in regard to this clause I am becoming more and more convinced that the clause is something that is not required in this particular bill. It becomes evident with every additional answer given by the minister today that the purpose of these people is to help with the organizing of the department, and as far as I can see we have people qualified to undertake that work in the public service of Canada at the present time. If we compare this clause with clause 15, there is also in clause 15 the power to secure the services on a temporary basis of those who may advise the minister and the department with regard to any manufacturing industry in any part of this nation.
1834	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: As the hon. member knows, Mr. Chairman, under the legislation setting up the wheat board there is provision both for employees of the wheat board itself and an advisory committee to the wheat board. To use this as an analogy, clause 5 relates to the staff of the department itself and clause 15 relates to the provision of advisers in the same sense as advisers to the wheat board or the advisory committee to the wheat board. The hon. member will agree that these two functions are quite different and the kind of man required is quite different.
The hon. member suggested that the purpose of clause 5 is to provide persons to organize the department. I do not think it would particularly need someone with an intimate knowledge of and experience in the basic steel industry to organize a government department. The purpose is not to provide advice on organization, but to provide advice in relation to the steel industry.


Edward Nasserden: I realize, Mr. Chairman, the importance of the steel industry to a department such as this, but it would seem to me that you might need a man for longer than the temporary period indicated in this measure. Would not an adviser in that capacity be required on a more permanent basis than would be provided under clause 15?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, those who would be appointed under clause 15 would be advisers on a continuing basis. They would not be employees of the department; they would come from outside and would continue, in that sense, to remain outside. Their functions would be as advisers and they would not be on the staff of the department. However, under clause 5 provision is made for the appointment of individuals who in the initial business organizing phase of the department will constitute, where they cannot be found from within the civil service, the staff of that department. If those individuals who are appointed under clause 5 can be persuaded to and desire to remain on in those jobs, they must, prior to December 31 1964, qualify under the civil service regulations. Clause 5 deals with staff; clause 15 deals with outside advisers, or advisory boards or advisory committees.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Chairman, I would like to get some information from the minister. He is talking about civil service work and advisers. I was wondering whether he has considered the help that could come from another department, if people were employed for one year under the same clause. Also, in view of the fact that we are dealing with a specialized industry, we will need specialized technicians with regard to that industry. Will there be any foreign assistance, or perhaps


civil servants, coming in from other countries to help us with regard to the production in this specialized industry in Canada? I am not talking about mass immigration in this respect, but perhaps we will need to take in some other people to assist in this connection. Could the minister give us some information on this subject?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, in so far as people now in the public service but within other government departments are concerned, they are already employees of the government and no special clause is needed in relation to their employment. In so far as those outside the government are concerned, I have expressed the hope that we have within the present industrial structure of Canada sufficient talent and ingenuity to enable us to find the necessary staff for this department without having recourse to the United States, to the United Kingdom or to the European countries. It would be my hope, and indeed it is my belief, that we could find within the present industrial structure of Canada the talents that we need.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: Mr. Chairman, the minister has given us an explanation as to the intention of dividing these two clauses 5 and 15. I have been reading them very carefully and I cannot see in the wording of the clauses themselves any difference in the authority which is granted. It seems to me, if I am not mistaken, that anyone who is appointed under clause 5 could just as easily be appointed under clause 15.


George Clyde Nowlan: Or under the Defence Production Act.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: Yes; or under another act. But clause 15 is the all-inclusive clause which, I submit, is wider than clause 5. Both clauses provide for the appointment of persons to advise and assist the minister, except that clause 5 uses the words, "advise and assist" and clause 15 uses the words "advise or aid". However, there is very little difference in effect, except that those appointed under clause 5 shall discontinue their service on December 31, 1964. To illustrate my point I would like to ask the minister this question. If a person who was appointed under clause 5 came to the end of his service on December 31, 1964, could he not be reappointed under clause 15 to continue his work in the same type of temporary appointment, and not be under the civil service regulations at all? It seems to me that in both cases they are governor in council appointments and are not subject to any of the limitations of the Civil Service Act as to examination or appointment. It seems to me that clause 15 is all inclusive,

that clause 5 is unnecessary and that anyone he would want to appoint could be appointed under clause 15.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, I think that the essential difference in clause 5, if one gets down to the words, is in the words "to advise and assist the minister in the work of the department". I am told that these words mean that this makes provision for such individuals forming part of the actual staff of the department and as such being able to do work of an executive character, to advise and assist the minister in the work of the department. In clause 15 the words used are "to advise or aid the minister". There is no reference there to "in the work of the department". The reason for the inclusion of those words in clause 5, was to make it clear that under clause 5 there was provision for the temporary engagement of people to staff the department.


Edward Nasserden: I think that all of us have great regard for those people who may have special knowledge of the manufacturing industries. However, the minister has come to parliament and is asking us to pass this clause which will give the governor in council the opportunity to select people to bring in for the purpose of organizing the department. From what has been said here today this might be a qualification for some of these people to be taken on the permanent staff of the department after December 31, 1964, and in my opinion this clause should be deleted.


Hugh John Flemming: I should like to ask the minister whether he does not consider that a good deal of the specialized work which will devolve upon this new department is already being carried on by the Department of Trade and Commerce to quite an extent?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Yes.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I think it is even broader than that, Mr. Chairman. A lot of the functions that will be undertaken by the new department are already carried on in other departments. What efforts will be made to co-ordinate those functions and bring about some intradepartmental co-operation? This was a subject that came under consideration in the Glassco commission report, and I would imagine that some serious attention is being given to rationalization and co-ordination of the functions already being carried on in various government departments in this area.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: As I tried to outline the other day, Mr. Chairman, the purpose of establishing this department is to try to bring about, to use a term which one member does not 28902-5-117J
Establishment of Industry Department like, the centralization within the federal government of all functions of government relating to the manufacturing industry in Canada. That is the purpose of the bill. It is recognized and has been stated that there are now being carried out in different areas of the federal government a large number of functions and duties which are here being devolved upon the minister and the purpose, as the hon. member has mentioned, is to co-ordinate the activities of the federal government in relation to the manufacturing industry.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: This would involve the
transfer of some departmental branches to the new department of industry?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: That is correct.


William Marvin Howe: On the
question of centralization and the experts that are going to be brought in, may I ask the minister whether experts are going to be brought in from the corresponding departments in all the provincial governments of Canada that have to do with the particular functions that are going to be involved?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I am not sure whether the hon. member means that the department of industry is going to hire provincial government employees.


William Marvin Howe: Are you
going to ask the provincial government departments corresponding to the Department of Trade and Commerce, for instance, to assist on a temporary basis?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: There will be, of course, the closest collaboration between the new ministry, if we ever get it established, and all provincial departments of economics and industry; and one of my first acts would be to endeavour to get together with the provincial ministers who are concerned in this field. Clause 5, however, does not contemplate nor has it any relation to this point.


Mr.   Kindi@: I understood the minister to indicate that the Department of Defence Production which he heads at the present time will be absorbed by the new department of industry.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Under this bill the Department of Defence Production will not be absorbed. There are a number of functions currently being performed by the Department of Defence Production which will be useful to the department of industry, but because there is only one minister they will not be duplicated within the department of industry. There will be the closest possible integration between the two departments. In the meantime, as I mentioned some time earlier, a review is
1836	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department being made of the functions of the Department of Defence Production with a view to the implementation of those aspects of the Glassco report which relate to expanding the functions of the present Department of Defence Production to cover areas other than merely defence procurement.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Chairman, we have been discussing clause 5 for some time. As some other members have mentioned, this clause could go together with clause 15 and it would save a lot of time. We have provision here for appointments on a temporary or probationary basis. At the end of 1964 they will not be eligible under clause 5 any more, but will come under clause 15. In subclause 2 of clause 5 it is specified that they will cease to be employed after the 31st of December, 1964 unless they have the necessary qualifications, but then they will come under clause 15. I think we are taking a lot of time on clause 5 and it would speed things up if we could hold it over until we reach clause 15.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I will repeat again to the hon. member-


Sydney John Smith: Before the minister starts may I interject one request along exactly the same line. From reading clause 15 there would appear to be three words in it that are very likely to prove objectionable to the official opposition. Those words are "appoint advisers and". Would the minister be willing to let clause 5 stand until he has had time to consider whether he will withdraw the words that we find objectionable in clause 15?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I am not sure what are the objectionable words.


Sydney John Smith: The words are "appoint advisers and". Those are the words that we find redundant and a duplication of words previously appearing in the bill. Without them clause 15 would then read: "The governor in council may establish advisory and other committees".


George Clyde Nowlan: I might say to the minister that I suggested a while ago that I thought it would be helpful if he would agree, as we have very often done in the past, to allow clause 5 to stand until we come to clause 15. In the Defence Production Act almost exactly the same language, if not exactly the same, is used and there is provision there that the minister shall have all the powers. Like the minister I should like to see some progress made and I suggest that we allow clause 5 to stand, and go on with the other clauses until we come to clause 15. Then we can revert, or do as the minister sees fit at that time.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: In the interest of progress-


Sydney John Smith: And amity.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: -and amity I would be glad to go along with this suggestion. I confess my inexperience in these matters.


The Chairman:: By consent shall clause 5 stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Clause 5 stands.
On clause 6-Duties, powers and functions of the minister.


George Clyde Nowlan: I think the minister should make some statement in respect of this clause. I know there are various detailed questions that could be asked, and I know some of my colleagues here are worried about which, if any, of these powers are not now attributed to one department or the other. I say to the minister, in all seriousness, that perhaps he could resolve the doubts which exist in a good many minds in respect of the basic philosophy of this bill. Where does manufacturing or industry stop and where does trade and commerce start? Where is the line?
This clause sets out the duties, functions and powers of the minister, which extend to and include all matters relating to manufacturing industries in Canada. I suppose, technically, that is it:	all manufacturing.
Surely, the department must go farther than that. There has to be a relationship between this manufacturing and the selling or disposing of the products which are manufactured, as well as the interrelated question of tariffs. Frankly, without taking up the time of the committee, because that is one thing I do not want to do for various reasons, we get back to the question I asked the minister the other day: Where do we draw the line?
I assumed, from reading the newspapers, that the minister will head the new department of industry. Where is the line between this department of industry and the Department of Trade and Commerce? Where does one start and the other end? I think that is the general problem which is raised by this as well as another clause in the bill. I can assure the minister that I am not raising this question simply for the purpose of obstructing or delaying the bill. This is the last thing I want. I was hoping we would make further progress and that certain things could happen so that we would be dealing with something else tonight. Apparently we are not going to reach that halcyon stage between now and five o'clock.
I believe this is the fundamental question. There are other questions which certain of my friends have, but I should like the minister to try to clear up what I feel is the root

problem in the establishment of this new department, which would be imposed upon the present department. Where do you draw the dividing line between the functions exercised by this minister and the functions that are going to be exercised by the Minister of Trade and Commerce?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member, in effect, is seeking a definition of manufacturing industries in Canada. It must be so because the duties, in so far as there are any duties incumbent upon this minister, are outlined in the bill. The powers, in so far as the minister has any powers, are outlined in this bill. The functions, in so far as there are functions, are also stipulated in this bill. We need merely to go on to subsequent clauses to discover what those powers are.
There is, perhaps, a question as to what is meant by "manufacturing industry". There is published by the dominion bureau of statistics a document known as catalogue No. 12501, occasional, and this is a classification of manufacturing industries in Canada. It is some 280 pages long. There are, in Canada, what are known as primary industries, and those are the ones relating mostly to Canadian raw materials in their initial form. We have now, within the federal government service, specific government departments relating to most of these primary industries, to wit, the Department of Agriculture in relation to primary food; the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys in relation to primary metalliferous products; the Department of Forestry in relation to forest products; the Department of Fisheries, the most important of all, in relation to our fisheries.
Beyond this stage of primary extractions, primary preparation, is the secondary stage of further processing. Popularly, this stage of manufacturing or industrial activity is called secondary, and it is with this phase of industry in Canada that the new department is concerned, secondary manufacturing in Canada. The classification or delineation of industries with which this new department will be concerned is contained in this large document. I would summarize to some extent by pointing out that there are 20 main classifications of manufacturing industries which I may read for the record:
1.	The food and beverage industry
2.	Tobacco products industry
3.	Rubber products industries
4.	Leather industries
5.	Textile industries
6.	Knitting mills
7.	Clothing industries
8.	Wood industries
9.	Furniture and fixture industries
10.	Paper and allied industries
11.	Printing, publishing and allied industries
4, 1963	1837
Establishment of Industry Department
12.	Primary metal industries
13.	Metal fabricating industries
14.	Machinery industries
15.	Transport equipment industries
16.	Electrical products industries
17.	Non-metallic mineral products industries
18.	Petroleum and coal products industries
19.	Chemical and chemical products industries
20.	Miscellaneous manufacturing industries
These are the industrial classifications. To endeavour to produce an all-encompassing, precise definition, certainly would be beyond my powers and I think the powers of most people. Generally, the manufacturing industry which is covered by the words "manufacturing industry" in the bill are those manufacturing industries in Canada contained, defined or listed by the dominion bureau of statistics under standard industrial classifications.
(Translation) :


Rémi Paul: Mr. Chairman, could the minister give us an explanation on the literal meaning of clause 6 which reads as follows:
The duties, powers and functions of the minister extend to and include all matters relating to manufacturing industries in Canada over which the parliament of Canada has jurisdiction.
The minister just gave us a list of the industries which figure in the booklet 12501 of the Department of Trade and Commerce, but will the activities of the new department extend to all the industries just referred to by the minister or will they be limited to companies incorporated under a federal statute? Will a corporation with a provincial charter fall under the jurisdiction of this act?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, I do not think a reference is made to charters, whether federal or provincial. There is no reference to the charter of a corporation but rather to the jurisdiction of the federal government concerning all corporations whether they hold a provincial or a federal charter.


Rémi Paul: Does the minister mean that activities of a corporation will determine whether or not it comes under the provisions of this act?
(Text):
I would like that answered.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, I think it would be perhaps more expeditious were I to listen to a number of questions than to try to answer them individually as they are put. It may avoid repetition. In this case I think the hon. member is implying that some industrial operations in Canada are going to come under the control of the minister, but this is neither the intention of the bill nor will it be my intention.
(Translation):


Rémi Paul: Is the minister not afraid to impinge, through the enactment of this legis-
1838	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department lation, upon the provisions of civil law concerning property and ownership, because some corporations come under provincial jurisdiction?
According to the remarks of the minister, it would now mean that the department wants to intervene in a field which is under exclusive provincial jurisdiction. And at this point one might wonder whether such legislation is not in contradiction of civil law?
(Text):


Mr. Prittie:: Mr. Chairman, I have just one question which I think is appropriate to ask at this point. Could the minister tell us does he contemplate transferring the small business branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce to the new department, or will it continue where it is at present?
(Translation):


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Chairman, following the answer just given by the minister to the hon. member for Berthier-Maskinonge-De-lanaudiere, I would like him to explain to the committee what the following expression means:
-to manufacturing industries in Canada which are under the jurisdiction of the Canadian parliament-"
(Text):


Sydney John Smith: I would like to ask the minister is it proposed to transfer the functions of the industrial development bank to the new department, and is it proposed to transfer part of the functions of the dominion bureau of statistics also? If not, then it would seem from the bill that there will be a great duplication in the reporting required of companies, and I may say companies are already a bit tired of reporting things to the government.
(Translation):


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Chairman, it seems that the matter raised at this time is a particularly delicate one, especially in eastern Canada. Could the minister tell us approximately where is the dividing line between the jurisdiction of the federal government and that of the provincial government, especially as far as the safeguard of provincial autonomy is concerned. I ask this question because all this seems confused and to constitute a certain infringement, because there is no dividing line, so to speak.
Can the minister tell us what will be the dividing line and what provisions are being made to restrict the department to its particular field and the provinces to their own fields, without any infringement, neither on one side, nor on the other?


(Text):


George Robson Muir: When the Minister of Trade and Commerce was in the house he spoke of the functions that it will be possible to centralize in this department. I am rather surprised at his equanimity sitting here part of the afternoon and watching a major operation taking place on his department. It seems to me the whole bill is a first rate example of the application of Parkinson's law to the functions of government.
I would like the minister to tell us what functions will be centralized by the setting up of this department, and I would also like to have him answer a question which I put to him the other day and which he said could be answered when we got to clause 6. At that time I asked him was it the intention of the government to make funds available to finance some of the industries that it would be considering, and his answer was that clause 6 would indicate the process through which the new department would have to go. Will the department set up a maximum amount of money to be spent during any one year, or are we just going to give the government a blank cheque and say, "spend it as you like"?


Lucien Lamoureux: Shall clause 6 carry? (Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask a question of the minister. If a province wished to set up a heavy industry such as is the case with the province of Quebec which is considering the establishment of a steel complex, what facilities would the new department of industry have to offer, without violating provincial autonomy, what steps could it take for the express purpose of helping our province set up a steel industry?
I feel my question is of great actuality especially in the province of Quebec where economic liberation is a frequent topic of conversation these days. I would be most happy if the minister could tell us how the new department could play a useful role and help a province like Quebec to carry out such a project by granting long term loans or doing research work.
I am aware that Ontario, which wanted an atomic power plant, entrusted the Chalk River laboratory, that is atomic energy, with the research needed to set up such a plant. Such research cost the Canadian government, according to what I have been told, about $30 million. That amount was paid by all the taxpayers of Canada in order to set up, in the province of Ontario, an atomic power plant that, in a few years, will supply power to the province of Ontario and will help its industry directly.

Should the province of Quebec ask the minister to allow the national research board to conduct the research required to enable it to set up a steel plant, would he agree to make such a recommendation to the national research board, even if that study were to entail an expenditure of approximately $15 to $20 million, as was the case for the province of Ontario?
We would be very happy to know what the minister would do, especially we, in Quebec, who consider that a great proportion of unemployment-
(Text):


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. It being five o'clock it is my duty to leave the chair in order that the house may proceed to the consideration of private members' business pursuant to section 3 of standing order 15.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. S-12, respecting Ukrainian National Federation of Canada-Mr. Mandziuk.

Mr. Ian Grant Wahn (St. Paul's) moved: the second reading of Bill No. S-20, respecting General Mortgage Service Corporation of Canada.
He said: General Mortgage Service Corporation was incorporated in 1961 after the incorporating bill had been very carefully considered both by this house and the other place. A bill similar to the present amending bill was introduced last session in the other place and was given a second reading and referred to committee there. Dissolution prevented passing of that amending bill. Hence the introduction of the present amending bill.
The debates I have referred to contain a great deal of interesting and useful information with regard to the company and its purposes and for the benefit of those who may be interested in reviewing them before discussion in committee, may I provide the following references where the discussion can be found: Debates of the Senate, 1960-61, pages 550 to 556, pages 583 to 584 and pages 630 to 636; debates of the Senate 1962-63, pages 545 to 547 and current Senate debates pages 117 to 120; House of Commons debates, 1960-61, pages 6284 to 6288 and pages 7143 to 7147.
I might add that when the incorporating bill was in committee of this house, members of all parties emphasized the careful manner in which the measure had been considered in the course of its passage through parliament
Private Bills
Because of the careful consideration which it has been given in the past, I feel I should be very brief, but a few words with regard to the purposes of the company may be helpful in explaining the reasons for the introduction of the amending bill now before this house.
One of the principal purposes of the company was to widen the market in Canada for N.H.A. and conventional mortgages. To this end, the company was authorized to raise money by the issue of its own series A mortgage bonds and to invest the proceeds in N.H.A. mortgages, thus widening the market for such mortgages. The company was also authorized to raise money by the issue of series B mortgage bonds. The money so raised was to be kept separate from the money raised by the sale of the series A mortgage bonds and was to be invested in mortgages other than N.H.A. mortgages or, alternatively, in real estate for the production of income.
The purposes of the amending bill now before this house are threefold. The first is to provide for the use of a French name. This is provided for in clause one of the amending bill. The second purpose is to permit the company to invest funds in securities of, or guaranteed by, the government of Canada or the government of any province of Canada or any loans fully protected by such securities, pending the investment by the company of such moneys in N.H.A. mortgages. This is provided for by the new section 9A which is set out in clause 2 of the amending bill.
The third purpose is to remove any doubt that might have existed under the original incorporating statute that the company not only has the right to sell its series A mortgage bonds and series B mortgage bonds, but also has the right to pledge such bonds to any Canadian chartered bank as security for money borrowed, provided that the principal amount of the bonds so issued by way of pledge does not exceed the money borrowed on the security thereof. This is provided for in new section 9B contained in clause 2. New sections 9C, 9D, 9E contained in clause 2 of the amending bill are merely technical in nature and are made necessary by the provision permitting the company to pledge its bonds to chartered banks.
I should also point out to the house that this company is subject to the regulatory provisions set out in the Loan Companies Act. The amending bill has been cleared with, and is satisfactory to, Mr. K. R. MacGregor, the superintendent of insurance, under whose department the company is registered. It is my understanding that Mr. MacGregor and officers in the company will be available in

Private Bills
the committee to which I trust this bill will be referred to answer in detail any questions which hon. members may have.
Finally, perhaps I might mention that the company's act of incorporation provides that not less than 75 per cent of the directors of the corporation shall at all times be Canadian citizens ordinarily resident in Canada. It also provides that at least 60 per cent of any offering of stock shall be reserved for a period of 15 days from the date of such offering for purchase by corporate or natural persons ordinarily resident in Canada.
I am informed that in fact all directors and officers are Canadian and that about 99 per cent of the outstanding stock is owned by Canadians.


William Arnold Peters: I am
sure we appreciate the remarks made by the sponsor of this bill. I, personally, welcome his statement that the directors of this company are all Canadians and that the majority of the stock is held in Canada. This, of course, corresponds with the provisions we would like to see incorporated in all these measures as a directive to companies bringing bills before parliament so as to bring about a situation which, I am sure, all hon. members are desirous of achieving.
This particular amendment is of interest for two reasons. The sponsor has told us that a change of name is involved. The company wishes to have a French as well as an English name. I think all hon. members, and particularly those fluent in both French and English, would be interested in a discussion which took place in the Senate on June 27. The point at issue may seem to be a small one, but I think it deserves close consideration. It illustrates the necessity of obtaining the best advice possible as to the correctness or otherwise of the translation. I was interested to note that the remarks made in the Senate about the adequacy of the translation were not particularly favourable. Hon. senators asked whether it would be possible to produce a more appropriate French version of the name, and considerable discussion took place as to whether or not it was possible for legislators to make amendments to a bill going so far as to change the actual name itself. The question was raised whether such an amendment would be good legislation-whether it would be desirable to introduce a French version of the name which was not necessarily a direct translation. Some companies would have an exact translation of their name and others would not. We appreciate the remarks made as to the changes in the financial structure of both the A and B series of mortgages, the series A covering the bonds issued by the company for national housing loans, and series

B bonds covering other than national housing loans. I believe the sponsor, in presenting this information today, has fulfilled some of the requirements which we have suggested should be inherent in all private bills brought before this house, and I personally am very happy that he was able to inform us that the requirements of Canadian directorship in this company have been extended beyond the requirements of the present act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on banking and commerce.


[Stage Direction]
On the order:
Second reading of Bill No. C-18, an act to grant amnesty to and confirm the rights of Asians, Africans and other persons subject to racial discrimination whose admission to Canada may have been irregular or illegal.-Mr. Wahn.
Ian Grant Wahn: Mr. Speaker, may I say a word on this. It is my understanding that, as forecast in the speech from the thone, the government will undertake a major review of immigration policy. I hope that following this review reforms will be made promptly which will establish a more satisfactory amnesty policy for those who have been victims of discrimination in the past and prevent continuance of discriminatory practices in the future. Since the whole matter is under review I ask that this bill stand.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Bill stands.



ANNUAL VACATIONS ACT


Stanley Howard Knowles: the second reading of Bill No. C-20, to amend the Annual Vacations Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, this is a very simple bill, and very easy to understand. It does only one thing. Therefore my remarks will be brief and I hope the house will agree to the principle of the bill. The bill proposes an amendment to the Annual Vacations Act. As hon. members are aware, the Annual Vacations Act, which was passed in the 1957-58 session, provides that all employees who come under federal labour jurisdiction shall be entitled to an annual vacation. The main detail of that provision is that an employee who has worked at a job for two years or more gets two weeks vacation with pay. However, as the act now reads an employee who

has worked for less than two years but more than one year gets only one week's vacation.
At the time this legislation was presented to parliament we tried to get the government of the day to amend its own bill to make the provision for two weeks vacation with pay applicable after one year of employment. As a matter of fact, even before the government of that day brought in its bill I had introduced, in fact I had done so on several occasions, a bill calling for two weeks vacation after one year, and it was a matter of regret to me that the lead having been given and a better bill having been drafted the government of that day did not go all the way. The purpose of this amending bill is to correct that slight error. If this bill is passed it would amend the Annual Vacations Act to provide that employees coming under federal labour jurisdiction would in all cases get two weeks annual vacation with pay after employment for one year. There is, of course, provision as to what happens in the case of those who work for less than one year, namely that they get vacation pay on a pro rata basis; but that is a detail which we need not go into at this time.
I might say that when I introduced this measure in the days prior to the election of 1957 it did not get much support from the Liberals; but it did get support from the Liberals during the days when they were in opposition. Now they are back on the other side again, and I hope they do not keep changing back and forth. I hope that some of that change of heart, some of that contrition, some of that new approach that we have heard about, will express itself in the present government's attitude toward labour legislation. We have already had one instance of the Liberals talking out a piece of labour legislation which they supported when in opposition. I hope they are not going to do that today.
As I say, this is a simple bill carrying out a proposal supported by the Liberals when they were in opposition. It carries out one of the proposals advocated by them during the election campaign, namely an over-all labour code which would provide for statutory holidays with pay, for minimum wage legislation, for maximum hours legislation, and for two weeks annual vacation after one year's service. Because this is the position of the Liberal government, and has been the position since at least 1957, and because they took that position in the recent election campaign, I hope they will support this measure.
I wish to make it very clear, Mr. Speaker, that if this bill is given second reading I will not try to move it into committee of the whole and push it through all its stages in one day. If it gets second reading or approval
Annual Vacations Act
in principle it can, of course be dealt with at a later occasion. In that event I would move that the bill be referred to the standing committee on industrial relations.
As I say, Mr. Speaker, the principle of this bill is very simple. It is one that has not only had the support of the Liberals during certain times, but it had the support of the Tories in days gone by before they were in power. I hope we can correct all this musical chairs business that we have had in recent years and can get together today on something that at one time or another we have all agreed upon, namely that workers should have two weeks annual vacation with pay after one year's service. Therefore, I hope it will not take the house too long to reach a decision on this bill, and that the decision will be favourable.


Mr. Gerald A. Regan (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the house are of course in agreement with the purpose and principle embodied in Bill No. C-20. Belonging to the party that has enacted practically all the labour legislation in effect in this country, and a party that has for some time included two weeks vacation with pay in its proposed labour legislation, there can be no question with regard to our position on the principle which is embodied in this bill. I was very pleased a few minutes ago to hear the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) refer to the fact that we had shifted back to this side of the house, and then say he hoped we would not be shifting any more.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is a gross misunderstanding.


Gerald Augustine Regan: We are in full concurrence with the sentiment the hon. member expressed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows that I meant a shifting of views.


Gerald Augustine Regan: Mr. Speaker, if there is one thing with regard to which I would express some regret with reference to this bill, it is that I wish this house had the constitutional power to pass such legislation for all workers in Canada. Unfortunately the provisions of the British North America Act restrict the application of federal labour legislation to a relatively narrow field of enterprise. But we would hope-


An hon. Member:: What about centralization?


Gerald Augustine Regan: I am in favour of this type of centralization. But we would hope that such enactments in the labour field would lead those provinces which do not have at the present time vacation with pay legislation, which is as favourable as would be provided under this bill, to follow this example. It is

Annual Vacations Act
my understanding that four provinces have provisions at least as favourable as this at the present time, and the others do not.


Stanley Howard Knowles: As favourable or more favourable.


Gerald Augustine Regan: That is what I said. They are meant to be, at any rate. There are some authorities-speaking of the constitutional point-which maintain that a review by the courts of the extent of jurisdiction of federal labour legislation today would possibly result in a somewhat broadened recognition of the scope of application of federal legislation. I do not know whether this is the case, but it is interesting that it has been quite a period of time since the courts have had occasion to review this question.
Two weeks annual vacation with pay is only part of the changes proposed by this government in the field of labour legislation. We already have on the order paper a resolution to establish the Canadian pension plan, which will provide portable pensions for our workers, and we are now studying the effects of further labour legislation on the industries concerned. During the election campaigns of 1962 and 1963 the Liberal party indicated that it would institute a federal labour code which would apply to industries under federal jurisdiction and work done under federal contracts. This labour code, according to our undertakings, would establish a minimum wage of $1.25 an hour, a maximum working week of 40 hours, pay for two weeks vacation-as is embodied in this bill-and at least seven statutory holidays, with national standards of health and safety and other working conditions for the protection of the public interest.


Stanley Howard Knowles: When?


Gerald Augustine Regan: My hope is as strong as the hon. member's that it will be in the very near future; and I feel quite confident that this will be the case. We in this party also recognize the need for a revision of our conciliation procedures and with the co-operation of trade unions and employers in this country we intend to speed up these procedures, which sometimes take quite a period of time, while at the same time not lessening the freedom of negotiation and not encouraging unnecessary conciliation when collective bargaining can effectively reach the desired end.
I mention these things, Mr. Speaker, to indicate that the subject raised in Bill No. C-20 namely revision of labour legislation, is only a part of the much larger proposal which we in this house must consider within a very short period of time. Based on the annual survey of working conditions of May 1, 1962 from the economics and research branch

of the Department of Labour, we see that 56 per cent of employees in industries under federal jurisdiction already get a minimum of two weeks vacation after one year's employment. This estimate excludes federal government employees who I believe already have vacation allowances at least equal to that proposed. It should also be pointed out that a large number of the employees in establishments not granting two weeks vacation after one year of employment do qualify for two weeks vacation after a longer term of service.
Some facts are clear, however, Mr. Speaker. The bulk of the impact of a reduction from two years to one year would be felt mainly by the railway industry, where provisions are for two weeks vacation after two years of employment. There are more than 130,000 employees in this industry, which is approximately 41 per cent of the total now under consideration. Twenty per cent of these already get two weeks vacation after one year's employment. Of the remainder it is difficult to estimate how many would be affected by the proposed change, as it can be expected that most of them would have more than two years seniority in their positions at this time. But regardless of the cost of the implementation of the principle embodied in this bill as affecting the railway industry, and indeed those other industries which do not have such a liberal provision at the present time-but I am speaking specifically of the railway industry-I think the workers have subsidized the railway by working for substandard fringe benefits long enough, and it is only proper that they should receive the same consideration as other citizens.
Consideration of labour legislation of this type is topical at the moment because the International Labour Organization recently completed its annual deliberations at Geneva, Switzerland. This organization, in its annual gatherings, with representatives of almost every trade union of nearly every country in the world, has over the years passed something like 120 conventions with the hope that all the principal countries would accept those conventions. Canada's record as regards accepting the conventions passed by the I.L.O. is very bad indeed; it is one of the worst of all countries. I think I am accurate when I say that less than 20 conventions passed by the I.L.O. have been adopted by Canada. We are sometimes told that this is because, first, Canada is a federal state and therefore, of course, the federal parliament does not have full jurisdiction in labour matters. But Germany is also a federal state and they have adopted a far greater number of conventions passed by the I.L.O. than has Canada. Another argument for the non-acceptance of

I.L.O. conventions in Canada has been that sometimes our existing legislation goes further. But I think, again, this is a fallacious argument, because it would be a very good example for Canada to set for other parts of the world if we were at least to adopt all the conventions passed by the I.L.O. as minimum standards, even if we do have better standards in this country.
I would urge personally that when the government is considering the adoption of the principle embodied in Bill No. C-20 it be included in a larger bill incorporating a number of measures such as were outlined in the Liberal platform in the past election. I would also suggest that in the latest convention passed last month at Geneva, Switzerland, by the I.L.O. there is a very worth-while subject which has not yet been touched upon, by federal legislation, at any rate, in Canada 'and which I think could very well be considered in the same bill as the question of increased vacation benefits. The convention comes close to a reform in labour legislation which I have long favoured.
I have long felt that there is a need for some sort of statutory grievance clause specifically applicable only to those employees in the country not covered by a collective agreement so that an employee who has gained what I would call a vested interest in his position by spending 15, 20 or 25 years at one job and who has built his home in the area and educated his children there because of the location of his employment, will not be lightly dismissed by his employer at the age of 55 or over merely because he has become half a step slower or because stampeding automation has made his skills outdated.


An hon. Member:: Would that apply to a member of parliament?


Gerald Augustine Regan: It would have to apply to a member of parliament; but I am sure there are none here on either side of the house who are not fully skilled. I want to point out that the convention passed at the most recent meeting of the I.L.O. embodied this type of consideration. It dealt with the conditions under which an employer could terminate the services of an employee. I am not going into the full details because I am wandering a bit from the immediate subject in the bill before us.


Stanley Howard Knowles: A bit?


Gerald Augustine Regan: I am returning forthwith to the bill. The convention dealt in general with the amount of notice that an employer must give to an employee and the fact that there must be a proper cause for dismissal. I do not know whether we would go so far as to say that a person with a very short term of employment
Annual Vacations Act
could not be dismissed after proper consideration, but I do feel that if the tenure of the employee in his position has been long enough that he has built up a considerable amount of seniority, there should be some protection for his job in circumstances where he is working in employment not covered by a collective agreement, and which in many instances because of the nature of the work or the small number of employees probably never will be covered by a collective agreement.
In leaving this subject and returning more directly to the subject in question, may I say that last month in Cape Richibucto, New Brunswick a long term employee by the name of Thomas Allein who was not covered by a collective agreement was discharged after having served for many years with the U.M. fishermen's co-operative. Ostensibly he was discharged for no reason at all, but there is some reason to believe that he was discharged for helping to organize a union. This is a case where there was no collective agreement and no effective remedy. This type of situation should be covered by legislation and I commend to the attention of the minister and the Department of Labour the convention passed recently by the I.L.O.


An hon. Member:: Talk about the bill.


Gerald Augustine Regan: I do think that we should take a general approach to a federal labour code rather than a piece by piece approach. I know that the government has the whole matter under active consideration and it is my hope that legislation will be presented to the house at this session to deal with the questions of minimum wages, hours of work, working conditions, safety regulations, statutory holidays and vacations with pay. I hope the government will look favourably upon the principle embodied in this bill. Certainly the hon. member who introduced it has shown over a period of time that he is genuinely interested in matters of this type.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to support the bill and it also pleases me that for a number of years I had the opportunity of introducing one of a similar nature.


Stanley Howard Knowles: While I was on vacation.


William Arnold Peters: While the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) was on vacation. The Annual Vacations Act that we have in the federal field applies, of course, only to those employees under the jurisdiction of the federal government. It does not really cover the same field as the I.L.O. does, and even under the limited provisions of the act we now have employees who do not receive the same consideration in some

Annual Vacations Act
parts of Canada that the hon. member suggested will be inherent in the new labour code that is going to be introduced this session, with my support as well as that of the previous speaker.
In the last few days a situation has come to my attention which indicates that even the limited provisions we now have are not being applied to those to whom I consider they should be applied. I have reference to employees in the Northwest Territories. I have spoken to officials of a number of branches of the government about this matter and I would point out that the problem is not nearly as simple as it might seem to be when areas are involved that are not under provincial jurisdiction. However, I was interested to find out that in many cases there are loopholes in the present Annual Vacations Act which are taken advantage of by employers in the Northwest Territories carrying out contracts under the jurisdiction of the federal government. To make the act applicable in the Northwest Territories the government has to declare the project to be in the interests of the public of Canada. Sections 2 (a) (viii) and 2 (a) (ix) of the act read as follows:
2. In this act,
(a)	"federal works, undertakings or businesses" means ...
(viii)	such works or undertakings as, although wholly situate within a province, are before or after their execution declared by the parliament of Canada to be for the general advantage of Canada or for the advantage of two or more of the provinces; and
(ix)	any work, undertaking or business outside the exclusive legislative authority of the legislature of any province, and all other works, undertakings or businesses that are within the legislative authority of the parliament of Canada, but not including any works, undertakings or businesses of a local or private nature in the Yukon Territory or the Northwest Territories.
I know that occasionally in some of the provinces there are difficulties in applying some of the terms of what we consider to be the very minimum provisions of federal acts, and certainly the Annual Vacations Act falls within this category. Even if this amendment to the act were adopted it could be further amended to bring about the advantages already enjoyed in some of the provinces. This legislation is not always applied even though it is the minimum in some of the provinces and I would suggest that one Liberal premier has not seen fit to endorse the ideas of the previous speaker and has spent a great deal of time and effort, not in providing legislation to assist but rather to retard the advancement of a labour code and normal operation under reasonable and accepted labour legislation.
I believe that the way this act is worded, Mr. Speaker, would make it applicable to the employees of the contractor in the

Northwest Territories who want annual vacations with pay under the terms of this special statute. This privilege is being denied to them because there is a difference of opinion amongst the various departments such as the Department of Labour, Department of Public Works, Department of Justice and also citizenship and immigration, which have some administrative responsibility for these employees in the Northwest Territories.
I should like to suggest to the mover of this bill that a further amendment be included to make this statute applicable, along with a number of other statutes included in the federal labour code, to the Northwest Territories and the Yukon in all spheres in which legislative action has not been taken by the councils of these areas. The terms set by this legislation should not be considered as the maximum or even as superseding those provided by collective agreement, but should be regarded as minimal provisions for a labour code to be applied in those areas not covered by collective agreement. I suggest that the Northwest Territories, under the commission, have been sorely neglected in this field. I was shocked to find how limited the knowledge of the commission was in regard to what applied in the Northwest Territories and what did not.
I received a request from one of my constituents who is now working in that area to ascertain whether or not the annual vacations with pay legislation applied. I spent the greater part of three days talking to 50 or 75 people in the various departments concerned. About half of them were of the opinion this legislation applied and the other half were of the opinion it did not. It seems to me it is about time that we provided federal legislation in the areas not covered by provincial legislation. I hope that this measure will be referred to a committee and that the committee will give some consideration to an amendment to the annual vacations with pay act which will provide the employees in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon with this coverage. I hope that this amendment will cover those employees who come within the jurisdiction of this measure in those areas where the territories or the provinces have not enacted such legislation. (Translation):


Mr. Jean-Louis Frenette (Portneuf):: Mr. Speaker, it always gives me pleasure to take part in the discussions that take place between five and six o'clock, because these debates take on a very special character.
Contrary to the usual practice, it seems then that very often all members support the proposals submitted to them.

As it will be six o'clock in fifteen minutes, I shall be brief.
I do not want to be accused of any offence with regard to this bill, but I would like to congratulate the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) who introduced it.
I can well conceive that such workers who are now covered by a federal legislation include a certain class who has not yet been able to organize itself. Therefore, I feel it is our duty to look after and protect this class of workers who are now left to their own devices.
In my opinion, that is fair to a majority of workers already organized or already protected by agreements.
Provincial laws should be fair to all workers, and that is why I believe I speak for all members of my group in strongly supporting the piece of legislation submitted in the form of Bill No. C-20.
I believe also that we should take this opportunity to give some guidance to labour legislation in certain provinces that are less advanced than others, and, if the example comes from the federal government, then chances are that it will be followed by other provinces which are less advanced in this field.
Now, the cabinet and the members on the government side complain that debates proceed at a slower pace than they would like. I believe that they should take advantage of this favourable opportunity which is given to us to pass a really constructive measure which would improve the status of our fellow citizens, that is my fellow workers, because I am still one of them. They should take advantage of this opportunity and give second reading to this bill so that it may be referred to the committee of industrial relations and that it may have the effect intended by the hon. member who moved it.
For all those reasons, Mr. Chairman, I shall resume my seat at once, but I am happy to give my strong support and co-operation to the bill.
(Text):


Miss Pauline Jewett (Northumberland):: Mr. Speaker, if I may be so presumptuous, I should like to say a few words of commendation to the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) for his very long adherence to the cause of better working conditions. This has been a long adherence, I know, although I have not been in the house myself. He has introduced bills time after time, year after year-


Stanley Howard Knowles: Since before you were born.
Annual Vacations Act


Pauline Jewett: -and he deserves the warm commendation of all of us for having done this. I am sure it has been, at times, a very frustrating experience for him, having to sort of chip away, year after year, at the stolid majority parties he has opposed. No doubt his main consolation, and perhaps the consolation of other hon. members in the smaller parties, particularly in his party, is that if it were not for them the Liberal party would still be in the stone age and the Conservative party in an even earlier era.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Would be?


Pauline Jewett: I am sure they console themselves with this thought. I should like to take this opportunity, indeed this is the reason I am standing up for a few minutes, of reminding him that there are, and always have been, a number of progressive spirits in these large omnibus parties. There are a number of us who have adhered to many of the ideas to which these hon. members have adhered, such as better working conditions, for a number of years. There are a number of us who want very much to see this kind of measure enacted. I believe, myself, there is a far greater likelihood of this being done today than there was during the past six years.
I think it is unfortunate that the attitude that is often taken by the public in this country is that all of the members of a large party-I speak now of the Liberal party-are moss-back reactionaries and that no new, bright progressive ideas would ever be implemented were it not for the members of the smaller parties. As the hon. gentleman knows there have been many members of my party who have pushed ideas such as this one. Indeed, the former leader of this party pushed ideas such as this. I am referring now to the late William Lyon Mackenzie King. I think one reason that they are not particularly sympathetic when we say we do push progressive ideas is that they have never, themselves, been in a position of any responsibility, of forming a government or of belonging to a large, omnibus party, where it is inevitably much more difficult to put one's own ideas across than it is when one belongs to a small, select group.
There is diversity of opinions across this country, and diversity of opinions within this party. Therefore those of us who may take certain views cannot just expect to have these adopted overnight. Indeed this was Mr. King's experience. I was reading the Secretary of State's book the other day and noted this comment, on page 572, where Mr. King said he was afraid the labour movement had been

Annual Vacations Act
getting away from the government of which he was the head, simply because of the degree to which some of his colleagues had become surrounded by interests that were at least not sympathetic to labour.
It is not the case that a large party in a country like Canada can always adopt ideas, which the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) thinks desirable, the minute the ideas first emerge. It takes a fair amount of time to broaden the basis of consent to these ideas, even to an idea such as two weeks holiday with pay after one year's work. I do want to remind him, however, that there are many of us who share his views, and once again I commend him for having so frequently brought this particular idea forward.


Hon. J. Watson MacNaughl (Solicitor General):: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration:
That this bill be not now read a second time but that the subject matter thereof be referred to the standing committee on industrial relations.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I rise for just a moment or so. While I had hoped that the bill might be given second reading and the bill itself be sent to the committee, nevertheless if those on the other side feel they are not prepared to move quite that fast then I do welcome what has now been proposed, namely that the subject matter be referred to the committee on industrial relations. I feel sure that the members of that committee will be sympathetic to the subject matter referred to them and as a result of that, whatever else the government may do in this session, I hope that the principle in the bill will be enacted before this session ends.
I am encouraged to believe that this may happen because the last time I had the subject matter of a bill referred to a committee the end result was successful. This is of course going back into ancient history. As the hon. member for Northumberland (Miss Jewett) said, I was moving bills of this kind long ago. For a number of years I had a bill seeking to protect pension rights against loss due to a strike. I have moved it repeatedly in a number of sessions and finally got the subject matter referred to the committee on industrial relations. As a result of its study by that committee we got the matter enacted into law. I hope that will be the case with this piece of legislation, and perchance with other pieces of legislation to come before the house in this session. Therefore I am prepared to support

the proposal that the subject matter be referred to the standing committee on industrial relations.
Motion, Mr. MacNaught, agreed to.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Gordon Harvey Aiken: Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of clarifying the matter that arose at five o'clock, I would like to raise a point of order. When items nos. 3 and 4 on the order paper in the name of Mr. Ormiston were called the hon. member who was acting as whip said "stand." The Acting Speaker said, "at the request of the government" and the Solicitor General said "No," following which the Acting Speaker said "stand".
I believe it was the understanding of most hon. members on this side of the house that the bills were to stand, but that the government was not initiating the request. However, under the provision of the rules, and particularly standing order 19, this order, if not allowed to stand at the request of the government, would be dropped to the bottom of the list of public bills.
I am raising the point first for clarification because it seems that some hon. members believe that the bills are standing and other hon. members believe they are dropped. I think this should be clarified, and second, I would like to make a plea on behalf of the sponsor of these two bills, who could not be here today, that they be allowed to stand and I would ask the Solicitor General if they could be allowed to stand. One in particular refers to the Western Canada Veterinary College. I understand he was left without sufficient notice, and for that we apologize on behalf of the sponsor of the bills. I would like to see them stand if at all possible, in the absence of the sponsor.


John Watson MacNaught: If it will help to clarify the situation I am prepared, on behalf of the government, to allow the two bills in question to stand.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: It is the understanding of the Chair that these two bills are left to stand at the request of the government? Agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


John Watson MacNaught: Mr. Speaker, the same rule should apply to Bill No. C-19 in the name of Mr. Thompson.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The same applies to Bill C-19. Agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. The hour
appointed for the consideration of private members' business having expired and it being six o'clock I do now leave the chair.



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration in committee of Bill No. C-74, respecting the department of industry-the Prime Minister-Mr. Lamoureux in the chair.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.

AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 8 p.m.
On clause 6-Duties, powers and functions of minister.
(Translation):
Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, as I was saying at five o'clock, when the house interrupted its current business, it would be most important that the Quebec government be given an opportunity to carry out its project. If the federal government could, through that new department, and while respecting the requirements of provincial autonomy, help in some way the province of Quebec to carry out that project, I feel our country would benefit from it, and that at a time when Canada is experiencing an exceptionally serious unemployment situation, particularly in the province of Quebec.
That is why I do hope the minister will be able to show us what means may be taken to assist the province of Quebec in carrying out its project.
(Text):


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: As a resident of the province of Quebec, I am fully conscious of the desire not only of the people of Quebec but of the government of Quebec that an integrated steel plant should be established within the confines of that province for the purpose of processing part, at least, of the iron ore which is mined within the province itself. To date, the provincial government has conducted a number of studies into this project the results of which are not known, either to me or to the federal government. Without knowing what the problems are, without knowing what are the needs which Quebec has, it is very difficult indeed, much as I would like to do so, to tell the hon. member precisely how a ministry of industry could be of assistance. However, I will again underline that the main function of this department, its raison d'etre, is to work toward the development of this kind of processing
4.	1963	1847
Establishment of Industry Department in Canada in co-operation with the provinces and all others concerned.
(Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, may I ask the
minister a supplementary question? Could he tell us if, according to the provisions of this bill, he expects to grant large loans for the development of our country's industries? (Text):


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: When we come to the next clause it will be seen that the first step in the functions of the new department will be to become acquainted with the problems which secondary manufacturing industry in Canada faces. There is a possibility that one of the solutions which will be found necessary will be the provision of financial assistance. In cases where that is so, it will be the task of the minister to recommend to the government the provision of funds in a form considered appropriate.
(Translation):


Rémi Paul: Mr. Chairman, on account of the answer just given by the minister, should we understand that the only objectives of the legislation, at present, are to advise and to give leadership to existing industries?
Could the hon. minister state the exact and definite functions he will have under the powers mentioned in this legislation? In spite of a careful and repeated examination of the legislation and a study that I made of the minister's speech, I could not find any definite information with regard to the exact duties of the minister concerning the implementation of this legislation. Would it be possible to know what will be the powers and duties assigned to him?
(Text):


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I think these are outlined in clause 7 to which I hope we shall get shortly.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
On clause 7-Further duties.
(Translation):
Rémi Paul: Mr. Chairman, could the minister answer my question now? He just stated that he would do so when we came to clause 7. (Text):


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: The best reply I can give is to read out clause 7. In this clause are set out the duties, the functions, of the minister and the department I think the hon. member is asking: what is the department going to do. It is all set out here, and I will read it:
The Minister shall
(a) cause the department to acquire a detailed knowledge of manufacturing industries in Canada.
This means we must become acquainted with the subjects with which we are going to deal.

Establishment of Industry Department
(b)	promote the establishment, growth, efficiency and improvement of manufacturing industries in Canada.
That is the object or the purpose of the department.
(c)	develop and carry out such programs and projects as may be appropriate.
The department will ascertain which programs are appropriate as a consequence of the knowledge gained under (a). Until one has acquired this knowledge, I defy anyone to say what are the solutions to be propounded under subparagraph (c). Then, the programs and projects will be appropriate-
(i)	to assist the adaptation of manufacturing industries to changing conditions in domestic and export markets, and to changes in the techniques of production,
(ii)	to identify and assist those manufacturing industries that require special measures to develop an unrealized potential or to cope with exceptional problems of adjustments, and
(iii)	to promote the development and use of modern industrial technology in Canada and improve the effectiveness of the participation by the government of Canada in industrial research.
Those are the means by which the government of Canada intends to carry out the particular objects of promoting the establishment, growth, efficiency and improvement of manufacturing industries in Canada. (Translation):


Rémi Paul: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the minister would refer to subparagraph (ii) of paragraph (c) in clause 7, and tell us how, under that provision, he will be able to assist industries?
(Text):


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I repeat that until one knows which industries require assistance, until one knows what are the factors leading to their needing assistance, or what are the problems which require solution, it is impossible to provide the solutions. Some industries suffer from a lack of research. Some industries suffer from a lack of financial resources. Some industries suffer within themselves from a lack of industrial organization; and until such time as one becomes familiar with particular industries and the problems of each, it is difficult to prescribe any sort of solution.


Paul Raymond Martineau: With regard to clause 7, which says that:
The minister shall
(a) cause the department to acquire a detailed knowledge of manufacturing industries in Canada-
-would the minister say whether the Department of Trade and Commerce does not already possess that knowledge? Second, I should like to know whether any of the proposed measures will also comprise compulsive measures. In other words, does the government, the department or the minister
fMr. Drury.]
intend to apply sanctions or impose controls in order to achieve these objectives?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: In answer to the first question, the Department of Trade and Commerce in its domestic commerce branch has gone some distance already with great efficiency to acquire a detailed knowledge of certain of the manufacturing industries of Canada. It would be the purpose of the new department to expand not only the depth of that knowledge but also the number of industries encompassed so as to enlarge the work already done. This will require not only the transfer then to the new department of those now engaged in that kind of work in the Department of Trade and Commerce, but it will also call for an expansion of the staff to broaden the area of knowledge and to increase the depth of knowledge.
In relation to the second question, which was whether the minister intended to control industry or apply sanctions, if one reads the bill it will be quite clear that the minister has no power to control industry. He is granted no power to impose sanctions; no sanctions are given. If indeed a circumstance should arise in which the only cure for a particular problem were the imposition of some control or the application of some sanction presumably legislative authority not provided in this bill would be needed. The minister is acquiring by this bill no new powers either to impose sanctions or to impose controls.


George Clyde Nowlan: Mr. Chairman, I was wondering whether the minister could deal with one section of the clause, clause 7 (c) (ii), which reads-
-to identify and assist those manufacturing industries that require special measures to develop an unrealized potential or to cope with exceptional problems of adjustments,-
and so on. I was wondering whether this subparagraph would cover the long term problems with which this nation is faced, problems to which the Minister of Trade and Commerce recently referred when he came back from Geneva, and the additional fact that there may be tariff adjustments. We all know what is going on in the country to the south of us. Promises have been made to the legislative branch of the government there that there will be a softening of the impact, and I know that the minister is fully conversant with this matter. Is this what he had in mind in the wording of clause 7 (c) (ii) -
-to cope with exceptional problems of adjustments-*
-might I ask? There are always routine problems of adjustment and exceptional problems of adjustment, as I am sure the minister must know, having been in commerce for a long while. I am asking whether

this does not have direct reference to the period of adjustments which we all hope will materialize, which will lead to tariff reductions, and will this give the department the chance to soften, shall we say, the impact of the adjustments which may be made in view of tariff discussions in the immediate future? -if not in the immediate future, certainly in the future.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I have no knowledge of what tariff changes might result from the forthcoming Kennedy round of tariff negotiations. However, there may be, as the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings has suggested, tariff changes in relation to Canadian industry which will bring about on the part of those industries or that particular industry exceptional problems of adjustments. It will be the duty of this department when organized not only to analyse these problems but to make recommendations for their solution. This is quite true.
However, as I am sure the hon. member is well aware, prospective tariff changes in an era of radical economic change are only one item. We had the case recently of a substantial uranium mining industry which today is facing exceptional problems of adjustments. This has nothing to do with tariffs; but still, here is a case where, were nothing done, there would indeed be a very violent dislocation of some substantial communities. It is this type of thing which was had in mind when the words "cope with exceptional problems of adjustments" were put into this clause.


George Clyde Nowlan: Reference has been made to the uranium mining industry, which it is true has no relevance whatever to tariff adjustments, or to major tariff adjustments; but I would assume that the Minister of Finance, with his responsibilities for fiscal and financial measures, would have to have the overriding responsibility, in connection with any recommendations which were made, to deal with not one but perhaps, as the minister and all of us realize, many industries which will be confronted with very drastic problems in this period of adjustment. Of course, the Minister of Finance has to deal with the cabinet in any event, but I assume it would ultimately be a problem for him rather than for the minister of industry to make the recommendations which will have to be advanced so as to safeguard and to look after the adjustments which I think lie ahead of us in the near future. After all, those who read can run, and those who run can read.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: The hon. gentleman having been a member of the previous cabinet for some time needs no instruction as to how it works, but I suggest that it would be the
4,	1963	1849
Establishment of Industry Department duty of this department to point up the problem. Perhaps we can disregard the question of who will have the most authority in determining the solution, but it is the job of this department to point up the problems and to recommend solutions.


Mr. Winkler:: Mr. Chairman, in regard to clause 7 and some of the remarks made by the minister, when he talked about special cases and special circumstances I was wondering whether he felt that there is or will be the possibility of a reduction in the tariff structure. When he referred specifically to the United States I wondered whether he felt that in some instances these special circumstances might involve the activities of lobby groups against Canadian industry, and whether he will have the opportunity to consult the authorities in this regard. I have found in the past that although a tariff in itself has not been the sole inhibiting factor, with certain companies doing business in the United States this other factor was an extremely important one. Does the minister feel that he will have the co-operation of the United States counterpart in taking the necessary action in this regard?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member has reference, largely, to a question of tariff administration. This could, and would be, more effectively carried out by the Minister of Trade and Commerce who is concerned with, as he pointed out this afternoon, external trade. The problem, namely the entry of our exports into other countries, to which the hon. member has reference is rather more the province of the Minister of Trade and Commerce than it would be of the minister of industry, though we will work together very closely in this matter.


Eric Alfred Winkler: Mr. Chairman, I have a question with regard to clause 7(b), and I do not wish to be facetious. Clause 7(b) states that the object is to promote the establishment, growth, efficiency and improvement of manufacturing industries in Canada. I am wondering whether, if we can get this bill through fast enough, the minister or the minister elect would use his good offices to this particular end, which I think is extremely laudable and will be effective in the removal of the 11 per cent sales tax.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I asked a question of the Minister of Justice this morning in this regard. I gave him an example concerning a company which was supposed to invest $40 million and which cancelled the project because this 11 per cent tax would increase their costs by $3 million.
1850	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, I will undertake to convey the representations to the Minister of Finance.


Eric Alfred Winkler: Thank you, sir.


Edward Nasserden: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether the minister could tell us whether there is any connection or relationship between clause 7(c) and clause 9 of part II.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, clause 7 generally relates to Canada as a whole and industry as a whole; it relates as much to healthy, prosperous industry as it does to what one might call ailing industry or ailing areas. Clause 7 encompasses the whole field, whereas part II, dealing with the area development agency, contains special provisions to meet the problems of areas of Canada, where, as a consequence of exceptional or chronic unemployment, special rather than general measures are necessary.


Mr. More:: Mr. Chairman, I think the minister understands my position in regard to this whole matter, but since my advice was not accepted, and the government assumes responsibility for the measure, I will have to accept the position. With regard to clause 7, I would like to ask the minister whether he feels there is any conflict between the duties imposed on this department and the duties as outlined for the economic council. I see a great similarity here. I have read the Prime Minister's speech upon introducing the resolution and I will again refer to it. One of the points he makes as being the purpose of the department is to carry out the various ideas transmitted to it by the economic council. The duties of the council are to check into industry, into automation, into greater production, and so on.
I see a great conflict here, and for the life of me I still see added bureaucracy imposed on business. It seems to me we are trying to push a cart one way and we have taken the horse that was pulling it off the other end by some of the other things we are doing. I do not know what progress is going to be made. My information indicates that government has a large enough partnership in business now; and there seems to be a great deal of paperwork involved. I am wondering what is the conflict. Is the minister of industry going to be the minister to whom the economic council reports, for instance? If not, is the council going to report to another department? If so, we will have more running back and forth and more bureaucracy on the neck of business. I am looking for simplified procedures for business, not more complicated ones; and I think business is looking for this also. I do not see that we are achieving this objective with


the bill which is before us and with the conflict that I see in the two measures.


Mr. Clancy:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister a question with regard to clause 7(a), which will cause the department to acquire a detailed knowledge of manufacturing industries in Canada. We have the dominion bureau of statistics, which publishes a great amount of information. Would this provision mean a duplication of that service, and would it ask every manufacturer to fill in a form every month?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: No, Mr. Chairman.


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: Just a moment, Mr. Chairman. I did not ask my question facetiously and I did not receive an answer from the minister. I will ask my question again. Does the minister not feel there is some conflict between the duties the act imposes upon the economic council and the duties imposed upon his department in this measure? Is business going to suffer an investigation by both these bodies?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: If I could oversimplify this question, Mr. Chairman-and this is always a very dangerous thing to do-I would say that the task of the economic council is to examine the whole economic framework of Canada and within that frame to make findings in relation not only to manufacturing industry, with which this bill is concerned, but all other aspects of the economic life of Canada.
In so far as the manufacturing industry sector of our total economy is concerned, this new department will be the executive arm of the economic council. In so far as the fisheries end of our whole economy is concerned, the Department of Fisheries would be the executive arm of the economic council of Canada. I could go with this analogy. One can unquestionably, on a hypothetical basis, arrive at possible conflicts amongst these varying duties, but this is inherent in any organization and one will have to rely on the normal machinery of government to avoid such conflicts. I do not think there will be any.
(Translation):


Mr. Latulippe:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask a question to the minister with regard to clause 7, subsection (b) of the bill under study. Is not the object of the present legislation to promote the establishment, growth, efficiency and improvement of manufacturing industries in order to increase production? Is not the object of this measure to establish new industries in Canada? And what, then? Is production insufficient in Canada?

(Text):


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, the purpose of the new department is, amongst other things, to enable existing industry to be able to produce more efficiently so that we will be able to be competitive in the markets of the world. If we are more competitive it will provide a new and, I hope, very much enlarged external market or external consumption, which the hon. member is seeking, for the products of our factories.
(Translation):


Henry P. Latulippe: I should like to ask a question of the minister.
If he finds means to increase production efficiency, thus making it possible for our country to compete more easily with other countries whereas, at present, storehouses are full of all kinds of commodities that we are unable to sell on foreign markets, what practical suggestion could he make to remedy the situation?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: If we succeed in reducing our production costs, it goes without saying that the storehouses will no longer be filled to capacity. Our present task is to find means of selling our products at a lower price.


Henry P. Latulippe: Will the minister reduce the interest rates paid by industries? Those charges are so high now that production is reduced accordingly with the result that the cost of living is going up all the time. I could add that production costs are rising constantly also. Consequently, those costs will have to be reduced and, to achieve that end, the government will have to intervene in all the sectors of the economy.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I have no control over interest rates and, moreover, that does not come under my jurisdiction.
(Text):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I think this will be the last question from this side on clause 7. In subclause (c) are the words "develop and carry out such programs". By "programs" do you mean joint programs with the provinces under agreements?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: In so far as a joint program is sought and it appears to be appropriate to the circumstances it would be a joint program. (Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I should like to remind the minister that joint programs have been strongly condemned by the premiers of both New Brunswick and Quebec. So I am most surprised to hear the minister's statement. I think the hon. member for Outremont-St. Jean (Mr. Lamontagne) is the one who inspired section 7 and more specifically paragraph (c).
4. 1963	1851
Establishment of Industry Department


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, if the premier of Quebec does not want any joint program, he will not have any.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: If there is no joint program, the province of Quebec will be automatically deprived of the assistance that it would be entitled to, and that because it does not want to accept the federal requirements, but is determined to stick to its principles and to retain its autonomy.
So, how can you realize national unity?
I know that the minister is a very courteous man; nevertheless, I believe his attitude is somewhat arrogant. I understand that perhaps he is not altogether responsible for the situation, since this bill has been worked over by the hon. member for Outremont-St. Jean. However, I believe the minister should change his attitude because tomorrow he will read in the newspapers the vigorous protests expressed, and rightly so, by Mr. Lesage and Mr. Levesque, and all the ministers.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Chairman, will the minister decide where the interest of the provinces lies?
(Text):


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, I want to make this quite clear. If the government of Quebec wishes a joint program and a joint program is appropriate there will be one. If the province of Quebec does not wish a joint program we will not have one. I do not call that peu poli.
(Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: But the province of Quebec is going to be deprived of the assistance that it could receive.
(Text):


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I think that what the hon. member really has in mind by the term "joint program" is a national joint spending program, and this has no relationship to this bill at all, or to my duties.


Hugh John Flemming: In the
activities of the department in dealing with specific industries in any province is it the intention of the minister, in order to carry out his laudable objective of making existing industry more competitive, to approach the matter from the point of view of direct cooperation with and assistance to industries located in any province, rather than working through the provincial governments?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: One should perhaps try to avoid confusion regarding the word "industry". It would be the intention of the new department at least at the outset to concern itself with an industry as a whole. This may be the pulp and paper industry. It would be our intention
1852	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department in conjunction with the industry as a whole to examine its problems and not to try to get into what may be situations where one company in a given industry is seeking assistance in order to be able to compete with another company elsewhere, but within the same industry. This will not be the role of the department. It will be to look at the manufacturing industries of Canada as a group, not individual companies.


Mr.   Kindi@: In subclause (b) it is stated that it will be the intention of the government to promote the establishment of industries. To what extent in that promotion work is it the thought of the government to employ social capital? I mean government money, in other words.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: That is a brand new euphemism for government money, and it is pointed out to me that it is quite inaccurate too. In cases where this would be useful and effective it would be my duty to recommend the expenditure of such money to the government. I ask the hon. member to bear in mind that the government can only spend money which has been appropriated to it by parliament. The passage of this bill is not going to endow the minister of industry with the power to dispense billions and billions of dollars. The only money which will be available to the government to spend for this purpose will be sums sought from and provided by parliament.


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: Mr. Chairman, I think this is the last time I will rise but I want to ask this question again. Will not the economic council under its legislation have to study and acquire a detailed knowledge of manufacturing industries in Canada to do the job imposed upon it? As I understand the situation it is to make such studies and to make recommendations to the department of industry. The minister says that the new department will look at the pulp and paper industry as a whole. Will the economic council not do that under the duties assigned to it? Are the pulp and paper industry and every other industry going to have two government bodies making detailed studies involving the imposing of the burden of paper work on them? How do we clear up this conflict? The minister's answer did not resolve it at all because I am looking at both bills.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, I have been in business too and am only too conscious of the disadvantage imposed on business by unnecessary and too voluminous returns called for by government. It would be my hope that this department would not be a burden to industry but an assistance, and one of the ways it can avoid being a burden on industry is by avoiding making calls for more


paperwork from industry. This is my view. In so far as conflict and duplication between the department of industry and the economic council of Canada are concerned it will be the task-perhaps I could use a medical analogy-of the economic council of Canada to look at the broad economic aspects of industry and industries without an examination of the details of those particular industries, somewhat similar to the functions of a general practitioner in relation to a patient. It will be the job of this department in relation to manufacturing industry in Canada to acquire the detailed knowledge which a medical specialist would acquire with regard to a patient and which might not be available to the general practitioner.


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: You are going to be the surgeon; that is what I am afraid of.
(Translation) :


Mr. Laprise:: Mr. Chairman, clause 7 of the bill states that the minister must develop and carry out such programs and projects as may be appropriate to promote the expansion of manufacturing industries in Canada.
I must say that I am in complete agreement with that, but do you not think that this development would mean increased production with less possible effort? And, under the circumstances, do you not think that this would increase unemployment?
Would there not be some way to adopt measures to improve the situation?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, as I explained the first day we debated this bill, the purpose of Canadian industries is to become more efficient, in other words to learn how to produce at lower cost. There certainly will be markets for their production where none exist today.
If we find the means to take hold of both domestic and foreign markets, through lower prices, we will have consumers and, in this way, we shall increase the rate of consumption. This is what we are looking forward to. Otherwise, if we do not increase our efficiency, we shall go under.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Chairman, must not industry itself take the means to improve its own efficiency? It is its responsibility and it knows what it should do to attain this aim. And, would not one of the means at the disposal of industry be largest possible freedom from government control?
In my opinion, what the government proposes is the establishment of a bureaucratic empire, because it seems to me that the objectives mentioned in this clause could not be attained unless we hire a large staff which will control the whole Canadian

industry. That is why I should appreciate it if the minister would give us more information on the point I have just raised.
(Text):


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: If the hon. member will permit a reply in English, I should like to cite a case in point. One Canadian industry, in the past, had not only been able to produce for the entire Canadian market, but also to do an export business. In the past few years this industry discovered that it was losing or had lost, not only its external market but was losing its internal market due to imports from a European country. The hon. member has suggested that in these circumstances an industry will know best what the cure is. The proposed cure advanced by this industry was a trip to Ottawa to secure higher tariffs on their product in order to prevent further foreign imports.
The officials of the Department of Trade and Commerce who, hitherto, had not been familiar with this particular industry or with this particular problem did take the trouble to acquire the detailed knowledge necessary to deal with the problem. They discovered that, the trouble was, perhaps as a consequence of lack of initiative or habit in their production processes, the industry had not engaged in a sufficient amount of research to keep up to date. As a consequence, their product, which was still serviceable, had not changed over the years. The foreign competitor was able to manufacture his product much more cheaply, and consequently this industry was losing markets. When this was made clear, that our Canadian industry had to reduce costs and engage in some research and development or they would not be able to survive, they agreed. They have done this. As a consequence, not only do they not now need tariff protection because they have been able to reduce their costs, but they have been able to recapture the Canadian market and are going back into the export business. This is an example which indicates that the industry itself does not always know what was best for it, and the cure did not necessitate any kind of subsidy from the federal government.
(Translation):


Mr. Belanger:: Mr. Chairman, the minister mentioned a while ago that he was seeking to cut down prices through increased productivity. He claims that such action will not add to the number of unemployed. Indeed, he should recognize that to increase productivity means to turn out more products by fewer people. So, that will certainly bring about a drop in prices but will at the same
4,	1963	1853
Establishment of Industry Department time increase unemployment and, consequently, will reduce the buying power of the people.
Besides, he said later on that such a policy would enable us to find outlets on foreign markets, and to produce more, all this being counterbalanced by the unemployment thus brought about.
But why look so much for outlets on foreign markets when there are right here in Canada quite a number of needs to be met? Does the minister not think it preferable to try and help the consumers to buy the existing production and then resort to foreign markets if we have something left. Of course, we would have surpluses. I think it would be more normal to look for a way to have our products consumed right here knowing that thousands of people need them.
I was reading recent statistics to the effect that the average Canadian family was lacking $4,000 worth of products. Would it not be one of the duties of that department to seek ways to provide for the purchase of greater amounts of products by our Canadian families who need them most at the present time?
(Text):


Robert William Prittie: While we were on clause 6 the minister seemed to be taking notes of the questions that were asked. I asked him a specific question and I have not yet received an answer. Will the small business branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce be transferred to the new department?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Yes.
(Translation):


Henry P. Latulippe: Mr. Chairman, if the minister focuses all the activities of Canadian industries on exportation, does he not feel that, in return, he will have to import. Therefore, this will certainly not solve the problem in Canada.
Usually, when we sell to a country, we must buy the same amount. What can the minister reply to that?
(Text):


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Chairman, I think the minister in answering a question posed to him by my colleague the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue gave a clearcut statement that indicated the necessity for establishing the new department has not been proven. He said that industry could not find a solution to a problem, and that the Department of Trade and Commerce found a solution. Why, therefore, do we need to form another department which will be a duplication of what already exists and what is giving satisfaction to industry at large?
1854	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, I think I tried to point out that the people, who are now doing this work in the Department of Trade and Commerce highly satisfactorily, will be transferred and be doing substantially the same work but over a wider area and to a greater degree than they now are.


Hugh John Flemming: I was not too happy with the answer the minister gave about getting in touch with small industry. He gave an example of dealing with a large and well organized industry, but in eastern Canada we have thousands-and I think this is right-of small sawmills, and unless there is a medium by which this department may inform them with respect to production and the ways in which production may be increased, then it seems to me there is no organization for conveying the information. I am wondering, will the minister give some consideration to that particular angle, because it is very important in our part of the country.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
On clause 8-Minister to exercise and perform duties, powers and functions of Minister of Defence Production.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, it seems to
me there are one or two points raised by clause 8 that it might be desirable for the minister to clarify. This clause indicates that in addition to the duties, powers and functions conferred by this bill, the new minister of industry is to exercise and perform all the duties and so on, vested in the Minister of Defence Production. I would like the hon. and learned minister to square that with section 3(1) of the Defence Production Act, which says:
There shall be a department of the government of Canada called the Department of Defence Production over which the Minister of Defence Production appointed by commission under the Great Seal of Canada shall preside.
I know there is also a piece of legislation known as the Public Service Rearrangement and Transfer of Duties Act, under which the governor in council can engage in a game of musical chairs to his heart's content; and that being the case, since functions can be transferred from one minister to another, (a) why is it necessary to have this clause 8 in the bill and, (b) is there not a conflict between clause 8 of this bill and section 3(1) of the Defence Production Act?
After the minister has cleared up these technical difficulties, will he then tell us in straightforward practical terms what is planned? Is it the intention to retain the Department of Defence Production, but not to have a minister over it and to have its functions carried on by the minister of industry?
[Mr. Ricard.l

There does not seem to be any suggestion in this clause that one person is to have the two titles. As I read it, the minister of industry, without also having the title of Minister of Defence Production, will carry out the duties of defence production, although on the other hand the Department of Defence Production, which is required by statute to have a minister, will be headless. This raises the question as to whether the new minister of industry will carry two portfolios, or will he be a one-headed person doing two jobs?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, the purpose of clause 8 is to ensure that there will be only one minister for these two portfolios. This is in recognition of the close relationship which exists between the functions of the Department of Defence Production, as it is now organized, and the new proposed ministry of industry. I have tried to emphasize that there are now a number of functions now carried out by the Department of Defence Production, and there is within that department a body of knowledge in relation to defence industry which we would not wish to duplicate in the department of industry. As a means of providing for a very close working relationship between these two departments, one minister will suffice for both.
I am told that this clause 8 in legal terms, constitutional terms, is adequate to achieve that objective, and that in fact there is no necessity explicitly to amend the Defence Production Act. This clause in itself will satisfy the need to provide only one minister for the two departments. The purpose in putting it in here is to make abundantly clear the intention of the government not to make provision for one more minister of the crown.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I think the minister has made the government's intention quite clear, and I appreciate his having done so. As I understand it, there is to be only one minister and I gather he is to be known as the minister of industry. There will, for the time being at any rate, be two departments but the Department of Defence Production, as the minister said, will be responsible through its deputy minister to the minister of industry.
I confess that, even though I may be seeking a free lesson in law, I am still puzzled as to why it is not necessary in clause 8 to use at least the words, "notwithstanding the provisions of the Defence Production Act," because that act says quite clearly in section 3(1):
There shall be a department of the government of Canada called the Department of Defence Production over which the Minister of Defence Production . . . shall preside.

I might also draw attention to section 9(1) of the Defence Production Act which reads:
The administration of the department shall be under the management and direction of the minister.
And the minister, in the definitions section, is defined as the Minister of Defence Production.
I think the minister realizes I am not quarrelling with what he has indicated to be the intention of the government. I realize he has lots of good legal advice around him over there, but how does he resolve this apparent conflict which will result in two acts saying two different things?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Subject to getting a confirmatory legal opinion that this would be appropriate, I see no objection to including the words suggested by the hon. member, "notwithstanding any provision of the Defence Production Act", or words to that effect.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Does the minister mean I can move an amendment and get it carried?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: If we could be sure of the proper terms of the amendment.


Stanley Howard Knowles: This is pretty important, Mr. Chairman, and I do not wish just to draft an amendment here and now that might not be legally correct. Perhaps the clause could stand until this point could be looked at by the appropriate legal advisers.


Mr. Weichel:: After listening to the question asked by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, Mr. Chairman, I feel my question would be quite in order. A few days ago, when discussing this bill, the minister said he thought he could look after the two positions, that is, the Minister of Defence Production and also the minister of industry. I am concerned about this because, after all, in my riding I have about 350 industries and I know a great many hon. members also have this fear. I believe that in about two years time this department will be one of the busiest in the administration. It is therefore important that we should have not only a minister of industry but also a minister of defence production. In a very short time I believe the government will be receiving representations from the Canadian Manufacturers' Association and other organizations asking for just what I am proposing now. If my suggestion is not feasible, perhaps another way could be found of bringing about a similar result. One such way might be to attach this new ministry to the Department of Trade and Commerce.


George Clyde Nowlan: May I say I think the suggestion of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre is one which deserves the consideration of the committee? I am not sure
Establishment of Industry Department what the attitude of the minister would be. There would, of course, be a simpler way of accomplishing this end. The hon. gentleman could make provision here for the repeal of the Defence Production Act. I wonder if the minister would be prepared to allow this clause to stand for a moment until he and his advisers have had an opportunity to consider it further. We could consider, then, what action we could take with respect to the clause. Frankly, I am unhappy about the form in which it is being presented to us at the moment. I hope we can move on and deal with the other clauses of the bill.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Do we have unanimous consent for clause 8 to stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Clause 8 stands.
On clause 9-Area development; designated areas.


Mr. Herridge:: I think it is true to say that the members of this group have been trying to co-operate in order to get the work of the house done, and we have given evidence of this desire to assist in getting on with legislation by being restrained in our comments and by dealing only with essential matters.
However, I do wish to say a few words on part II of this bill having to do with area development. I am particularly interested in this aspect of the administration of this measure. Incidentally, this is the first opportunity I have had to congratulate the hon. minister on his appointment. I think it is an appointment which gives him an opportunity to show his own mettle and the true colours of the Liberal party. I am sure that within his limited economic philosophy and the terms of this bill he is one of the best men we could get from the other side of the house. I say this sincerely, because I have a great respect for the minister. I like to see these young men taking an active part in the administration of this country. The hon. gentleman had good legal training and excellent military experience for which we give him full credit. I understand he was a first-class staff officer-one of the youngest brigadiers in the Canadian army. The rank of brigadier is just high enough to create a sense of awe, but not so high as to confer infallibility. I trust the situation will be the same as far as this measure is concerned. Then, again, the hon. gentleman has had administrative experience as deputy minister of national defence, and he has also had business experience, all of which are, in my opinion, excellent qualifications for a minister about to be given charge of this department.

Establishment of Industry Department
I do wish to say that in my opinion the successful operation of this legislation will depend on co-operation with a large number of people at all levels. I am one who realizes the difficulties faced today by any government in Canada in present circumstances which wants to maintain procedures and practices to which the majority of the people will give their consent. I hope this legislation will be applied within the framework of an over-all plan and that it will be related to other legislation which we have on the order paper at the present time. I should like the minister to explain just how he intends to relate the administration of this act to the over-all plan which is indicated in other legislation before this parliament.
I think it is essential that every effort be made to get co-operation between federal, provincial and other levels of government, because we shall be dealing with natural resources, manufacturing and almost every other aspect of production. To be successful we must develop this co-operation between the federal and provincial governments.
My experience in the past has been that good legislation has often not been appreciated because of the lack of adequate information and publicity. In this respect I mention the ARDA legislation passed by the former government. That had some good things in it, I admit. But those responsible for it failed to get across to the Canadian people the value of this legislation and what could be done with it. They did not get credit for it. I suggest to the minister that he should see that active publicity is given to the purpose of this legislation and that information about it is made available to industry, community organizations and so on at all levels.
Then I think every effort must be made to secure the participation on as wide a basis as possible of as many groups as possible including industry, organized labour and community organizations. I think we have never tapped the reservoir or pool of people who are willing to use their knowledge, experience, and talent, free of payment, because they have an interest in the welfare of our country. I suggest that every effort should be made to mobilize this reserve of experience, good will and intelligence down to local levels. It is at the local level that people have the experience of local conditions. That has sometimes been the cause of great difficulties; administrative officers living in Ottawa have no experience of conditions in some of our smaller towns and communities. I urge that this aspect of the administration of the bill before us should receive particular consideration.
I like to talk to people, to chat with them whether they agree with me or not. I like to

get their views, and I know from my own experience that there is a large reservoir of knowledge and ability which just needs to be mobilized behind something worth while, something concrete, for the service of the country. I make these remarks because I am particularly interested in the area development aspect of this bill, and in the development of the smaller communities. My experience of brigadiers is that sometimes they overlook the rear ranks. I hope the minister will not overlook the smaller communities of Canada in the administration of this bill.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Before the minister replies to the observations of the hon. member for Kootenay West I should like to deal briefly with part II and particularly with clause 9 on the subject of area development. I believe this is the part in the legislation which comes to grips with one of the major problems, namely, the necessity for dispersing industry across the country and in various regions of Canada, and also the need for establishing industrial development programs. I cannot quite agree with one or two of the remarks of the former member, who suggested that the former administration-


George Clyde Nowlan: He suggested the former member of the former administration.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I mean the hon. member who spoke briefly before me. He referred to the failure of the former government to publicize the various legislation in this important area of industrial development that it passed. I should like to suggest rather that the upsurge of industrial development which has occurred in recent years is substantially based on the spirit of co-operative federalism that was generated by programs which were sponsored by the former administration.
This brings me to the specific point which I would like to raise at this time. Because of the delay of the federal government in moving into this area, up until the past few years the provinces had moved very rapidly to fill the vacuum. For instance, in Manitoba some two years ago a very ambitious program of industrial development was launched. A committee known as the committee on Manitoba's economic future was established and it has produced a comprehensive report of some 1,000 pages which covers every phase of the problems of industrial development in that province. I am just wondering how closely the federal department of industry is going to co-operate and integrate with the very ambitious programs which are already established in the provinces across the country.
For example, in Manitoba they can even pinpoint the number of jobs which will be required by the year 1975. There will be an

additional 75,000 job opportunities required. The program they have already established, or announced, or have in process of planning is designed to meet the needs of its expanding population and economy. They have also set up such bodies as the economic consultative board, the Manitoba research council, the Manitoba design institute, the Manitoba export corporation. I think the minister will agree that many of the functions which are outlined and enunciated in the legislation actually belong to the provinces who have already seized the initiative. I am afraid, Mr. Chairman, that unless the present government continues this spirit of co-operative federalism which was so successfully established by the former administration we are going to have unnecessary and expensive duplication in this area. I hope he can assure the house and perhaps give us some specific idea how this co-operation and consultation is going to be continued.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I want to add a word to what was said by my colleague regarding the area development aspect of this legislation. I think a large part of the success of this new department and of its minister will be dependant upon the extent to which they can achieve area development, particularly in certain areas which have had less industrial development than others. The hon. member for Kootenay West mentioned the fact that there are pools of manpower and resources available which it would be a great pity to overlook.
One of the points I want to refer to the minister, and of which 1 am sure he is aware, is that the provinces now have developed fairly effective departments or branches of industrial development. Ten or twelve years ago very few provincial governments had effective departments or branches of industrial development, but they have spread until now I think almost every province in Canada has either a department or a branch of industrial development. For several years I had the privilege of attending the annual meeting of the ministers and heads of the departments and branches of industrial development of the provinces in Canada. They started in a very small way. I think the first interprovincial meeting which was held was attended by about four provinces only. At the last two or three meetings I attended almost every province in Canada was represented, not only by the ministers responsible but by the heads of the departments or branches concerned. They have set up a chairman and a secretary and have kept very close tag of each other, and in this way they have been able to integrate their programs.
28902-5-118
4, 1963	1857
Establishment of Industry Department
For example, if an industry is looking at one particular province but because of certain conditions it is inadvisable to proceed with their inquiries in that province, the industry concerned will be passed on to another province. There is no dog in the manger attitude about it. Of course, every province is out to get all the industry it can, but they do help each other and pass information back and forth. I have known instances where companies have come in from outside looking for a site, and when they could not find what they wanted have been passed on to another province and the information passed on with them. In this way a very excellent working cooperation has been developed at this level between the provinces. Also, in many of the provinces there has been established in connection with the department of industrial development, or trade and industry, or whatever it happens to be called, an industrial development committee or council on which there are business representatives, trade union representatives and people from various segments of the business world. They work closely with the provincial governments, and the boards of trade are tied in, as are also the trade unions. The result is that here, readymade, is some excellent machinery through which those departments work. I am sure the minister is aware of this, but I simply rise to point out that it would be a great mistake to set up a wholly new machine and to establish a bureaucracy which will duplicate what is already being done.
At the various annual conferences of the department of trade and industry to which I have referred there is usually a representative of the Department of Trade and Commerce. I think only on one occasion did we have the minister there, and that was to speak at a dinner or something of that sort. I think the federal government should take a much more active part in this interprovincial-what would really become a federal-provincial-conference on industrial development. I say that because these people have now reached a high degree of efficiency. They have gathered a wealth of information, and if this were put together with the efforts of the new department now being set up I can see a great deal of progress being made. I merely pass that on to the minister for his consideration.


Howard Russell MacEwan: Mr. Chairman, I have only a few short questions on clause 9 for the minister. I was not present in this chamber at the time, but I read that a question had been asked on Friday last, I believe by the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm, regarding the designation of the designated area. The clause reads:
1858	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department
The governor in council may designate as a designated area for the purposes of this act any district or locality in Canadaand so on. The minister at that time replied, I believe, that it would not be the plan to make this body operate in relation to the economic areas rather than the political boundaries or political areas.
1 wonder, in this regard, whether this legislation means-and of course this phrase "designated areas" is used all the way through in the succeeding clauses-a particular town or a city and the surrounding towns, or does it mean a larger area such as, in the Atlantic provinces, the whole Atlantic area, and so on? I would like that matter clarified if at all possible. What is more important, as far as the Atlantic area is concerned, is this. I wonder whether the minister could tell us briefly what the tie-in will be with this area development agency as far as the Atlantic development board is concerned.


Lawrence Elliott Kindt: Mr. Chairman, as I read clause 9 the establishment of a designated area is to be accomplished by using as the deciding factor the number of unemployed in the area; that is what the reading of the clause tells us. If that is so, then any other area which may have an abundance of resources and very little unemployment is not likely to receive any new industries. In other words, areas are to be designated by the department of industry which have a large number of unemployed. I know that the purpose back of the bill is to correct unemployment. This is one of the noble purposes of the bill and it is one which we all hope it will accomplish. However, when it comes to setting up industries for this purpose it is possible that in the area where there is unemployment and where industry is to be established you may not find the natural resources which will allow for the establishment of low cost industry. In other words, it requires the other elements of production; it may be steel, it may be natural gas, it may be by-products of hydrocarbons which are so abundant in the west, where we are begging for petrochemical industries. However, in those areas where this abundance of raw materials exists there is very little, if any, unemployment.
I would ask the minister this question. What is the touchstone which his department is going to use for the establishment and promotion of new industry? Is it to be 100 per cent those areas where there is tremendous unemployment, or will it cover those areas where there is an abundance of natural resources, where industries can be established, where internal migration of labour can take place, where high wages can be paid and


high returns received by management because of the low costs of production? In short is this the procedure to be followed, or are we to establish these industries in the surplus labour areas because of the very fact that they have a surplus of labour?
I come back again to this question, Mr. Chairman, and I should like to ask the minister what criterion he is to follow in the designation of areas toward which his efforts, as head of this new department, are to be directed in the establishment of new industries.


Mr. MacEachen:: Mr. Chairman, because of the importance of this particular part of the department of industry bill I would like to make a few remarks in support of part II of the bill. This proposed enactment introduced by the Minister of Defence Production is in fulfilment of a commitment made by the Prime Minister of Canada in a debate in the House of Commons two years ago. At that time the Prime Minister, speaking as leader of the opposition, put forward the necessity of establishing an area development agency the purpose of which would be to provide a special thrust for development in areas of high and chronic unemployment.
This is the first occasion in Canada that legislative effect is given to a policy of dealing specifically with depressed areas. These areas may more beneficially be called designated areas or development areas, as they are in other countries. Canada is certainly not the first country; it is rather far down the list of countries which have taken action in this particular field. In the United Kingdom the most recent reflection of this policy was the enactment of the local employment bill; and there is no doubt about it, under that particular bill and former enactments the relevant department in the United Kingdom was able to attract industries and create jobs in areas which otherwise would have remained moribund. It is a matter of record that President Kennedy during his travels in the United States was appalled by the conditions of poverty and unemployment that prevailed in the coalfields of Pennsylvania, and apparently he vowed during those travels that one of the first things he would do if he became president of the United States would be to establish an area development agency the purpose of which would be to provide new jobs and new industries in these particular areas. I think it is a matter of record, Mr. Chairman, that even in the short time this program has been in effect approximately a billion dollars have been provided by the United States government for the development of new industries and new facilities in these particular areas.



A. 1963

[Stage Direction]
I am sure that hon. members of the house realize we are not coping solely with an economic problem, the wastage of resources in the form of unemployed personnel; we are also dealing with a social problem and with the alleviation of harmful social effects that can arise from chronic unemployment. It is a fact that in certain parts of Canada unemployment has continued over a long period of time; that an abnormal percentage of the work force in these areas has remained unemployed. There is a stagnant pool of permanently unemployed in certain parts of Canada who, because of the lack of opportunity in these areas, ultimately lose their interest and capacity for work. Certainly it is a worthy objective to overcome unemployment for its economic effects, but also for its social benefits. Many of us in this house have been frustrated over the years at our incapacity to deal with certain communities in Canada that have been afflicted with special unemployment problems. Certain of these are well known to hon. members. They include Elliot Lake, Springhill and other communities in Canada. Here is an opportunity, under the area development agency, by which the government, the national authority can provide a special thrust for development.
We realize that coping with the problem of unemployment requires a balanced and manysided attack. The application of general fiscal and monetary policy, no matter how wisely developed and how skilfully executed may not have any effect in dealing with or curbing unemployment in these special areas. That is why there is a necessity for a special agency to provide special assistance for these areas of exceptional unemployment. If the measures contemplated in this particular enactment were applied generally, they would lose their effect in curbing unemployment in these areas of chronic difficulty. It is the intention to designate these areas through the development of suitable criteria. I understand that at the present time the Minister of Defence Production has set in motion studies by which these criteria will be developed. Surely part of the test of the designated area will be the level of unemployment, its duration over time and the rate of growth in the total employment in that area. After the criteria have been developed and the areas designated special assistance will then be made available to provide the special thrust required.
The proposal in the area development agency is a reflection of the policy of the government to give special support to designated areas or areas of slower growth. There is provision made in clause 10 of the bill by which new programs and new projects can be put into motion by the area development agency, a special agency within the 28902-5-118-j
Establishment of Industry Department federal government charged exclusively with this problem.
At the same time, in the elaboration of the municipal winter works incentive program the government has proposed that the federal share of payroll costs will be increased from 50 to 60 per cent in designated areas. Similarly, the government has undertaken to bring forward certain construction projects for which funds have not been provided in the current estimates. These are being brought forward to apply in designated areas of slower growth.
Hon. members will recall that in the budget the Minister of Finance provided major incentives for the creation of new industries in these designated areas. It should be pointed out that the tax incentives provided in the budget for new development in designated areas are the most ambitious fiscal attack ever made on this particular problem. These four instances I have mentioned provide very eloquent evidence of the wish of this government to deal with the giant problem of unemployment by tackling it in one of its most acute forms, namely, persistent chronic areas of unemployment. The Minister of Defence Production will provide a real service to Canada in applying his great talents to the prosecution of this new policy.
George Clyde Nowlan: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to co-operate with the Minister of Labour, for whom I have the greatest personal respect and liking, in slowing down the passage of this legislation to which he has contributed fairly substantially during the last 15 minutes. All I want to say is that there is no point whatsoever in discussing what may happen in Britain, France or any other place. We have a constitutional problem here. We have property and civil rights. We have dominion-provincial relations, and everything that the minister has said tonight has no more relation to the problem before us than the airy clouds which may be floating over the House of Commons at this moment.


An hon. Member:: Where were you?


George Clyde Nowlan: Where was I and where was the minister when these things were being discussed? If some of these airy clouds painted before us tonight materialize they will materialize because of the co-operation of the provinces. He and I are both aware that we have an overriding national responsibility here, but I think that he will agree with me that we both have a particular loyalty and interest in our own province, the province of Nova Scotia. Whatever may be done in developing these areas must be done in cooperation with the provincial government. I am sure that what has been done in that
1860	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department province since January of this year, where 11 or 12 major industries have been established due to the co-operation of the federal government and the provincial agency, Industrial Estates Limited, is the way in which this problem will be solved.
You can rest assured that it will not be solved by any proposal in the budget, if the budget survives, of course. I suggest that in Nova Scotia we do not want any corporation to come there because they hope to escape income tax for a period of three years. If that is their idea in coming there we do not want them there-period. It is not because of the budget that we are going to get them but on the basis of co-operation between the dominion and provincial governments. I am quite sure that when this bill goes through, as I hope it will, the minister of industry in co-operation with the provincial administrations will be able to accomplish a great deal in helping to develop some of these areas.
I am not going to take much time tonight but I should like to know what the yardstick is going to be. I went through some of this myself a year or two ago in connection with certain incentives that we brought forward to deal with what were called surplus labour areas. I am not sure what phrase the minister is going to use, though it may be "designated areas". All I want to say is that this is a very complicated problem. It is not a simple one, and there is no need to refer to what has happened in other countries, as most members of the house know. It is a matter of accommodation and co-operation between the provinces and the federal government and very often the municipal governments as well. It will be on that basis that we will attempt to achieve some of these developments to which the Minister of Labour made reference a few moments ago.


Mr. Valade:: I have a question for the Minister of Labour in view of the highly political statement he made a while ago. In those depressed areas where people are relying on the building of houses for their livelihood, I wonder whether the Minister of Labour will recommend that as a special measure the 11 per cent tax on building materials be removed?


Mr. Barnett:: Mr. Chairman, I was seeking to catch your eye before the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis entered into the discussion and I have some trepidation in intervening now in a discussion initiated by two Nova Scotians, the hon. member for Digby-An-napolis-Kings and the Minister of Labour. I do not want to become involved in the airy clouds that apparently are floating between them.


I do wish to say that while I have no quarrel with any of the remarks made by the Minister of Labour, and while I appreciate the interest he has, coming from the part of Canada he does, in the topic he was discussing I should like to raise a point with the Minister of Defence Production similar to that raised earlier by the hon. member for Macleod. I feel that as this clause is now worded it may in effect be self-defeating. I think I can best make my point by reading the clause which is short, and is in these words:
The governor in council may designate as a designated area for the purposes of this act any district or locality in Canada that is determined to require special measures to permit economic development or industrial adjustment by reason of the exceptional nature or degree of unemployment in that area.
I certainly agree with the Minister of Labour that there are areas in this country where the chronic unemployment situation which he has described has prevailed. I am one of the members of this house who hope that is not going to be a permanent condition in Canada. For that reason I feel that the clause, as it is now worded, will in effect become a self-defeating measure. As I see it, once we have taken up the slack in this chronic unemployment that exists in certain areas, then if there is any real purpose in setting up this department we would hope the department would be free to continue to pursue a course of action which would ensure that, in the future, we would not again have areas of chronic unemployment.
It is for this reason I feel the hon. member for Macleod made his point well in drawing to the attention of the committee and the minister the idea that this clause should be so phrased that it would be possible for it to apply to areas where the exceptional nature or degree of unemployment may not exist. I do not believe anyone in this house would quarrel with the idea that areas in which chronic unemployment does exist should have top priority in respect of any application of this provision. However, if I understood some of the phrases correctly that were used by the Minister of Labour he was, himself, implying that while this measure was primarily directed towards these areas of chronic unemployment, it could embrace a broader sphere.
I feel this clause, as it is worded, very definitely and specifically limits activity to those areas designated. I should like to suggest to the minister that he consider rewording this clause so that while priority would be given to areas of exceptional unemployment, activity would not be limited to those areas. As I believe the hon. member for Macleod correctly pointed out, there may be certain

conditions in areas under which it may be desirable, not only from an economic point of view but also from a social point of view, to have the attention of the area council under this part of the act directed towards their development. There may not be at the moment any great numbers in that area either employed or unemployed, but there may be a natural opportunity to assure that the slack in the economy can be taken up. I would, in all seriousness, suggest that the minister give consideration to a modification of clause 9 so that, while it would make it clear that the immediate intent would be to deal with areas in which there is high unemployment, once that question had been dealt with the functioning of the department and of the area council set up in this area would not end.


Edward Nasserden: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a word or two in furtherance of the argument that has been put forward by the hon. member for Macleod and the hon. member who has just taken his seat. We all know that one the great factors entering into the high cost economy that has developed in Canada has been transportation costs. We also know that the recommendations contained in the report of the MacPherson commission are not going to appreciably reduce these transportation costs. It has occurred to me, as it has occurred to other members, that the restriction of area development by reason of the exceptional nature or degree of unemployment in a particular area, is limiting the use that can be made of this particular part of the act. This limitation may work an undue hardship on the people of some other area of Canada. I should like to add my words to those of the other two members and ask the minister if he would consider amending this particular section along the lines indicated by the two preceding speakers.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Chairman, the province of Ontario, for some time, has been, to use a colloquial phrase, horsing around with area development. It all began with one of the greatest gambits in face-saving by Premier Frost when he decided to set up a number of development associations. These, on the face of it, were regional entities. Unfortunately, perhaps, they were subsidized by the provincial treasury and they were able to offer salaries of from $10,000 to $12,000 a year to men to set up little bureaus that somehow gave local chambers of commerce in various parts of Ontario and certain municipalities the feeling that at last they had an agency that was going to go into area development.
4,	1963
Establishment of Industry Department
Well, the story of these economic development associations in Ontario has been one of gradual decline in enthusiasm. As a matter of fact, in various parts of Ontario there has been a falling away of the membership since part of the funds to support them come from such bodies as the associated chambers and municipalities. It was quite apparent, about three and a half or four years ago that the economic development association idea in Port Arthur or in Ontario had pretty well gone bust; it was not getting anywhere.
Again, Mr. Frost was the excellent politician. As I understand him he always was able, in the Mackenzie King tradition, to procrastinate slowly and well, and the provincial government of Ontario began to move to something a little bit more definitive. This found its spokesman and its great expression in Robert Macaulay. They call him Bright Bob and a lot of other nicknames. He has been booming around the province now for several years and he has, in a sense, shoved to one side the economic development association concept which was originally within the Ontario framework, and has created what are called economic regional councils. We have had one now for well over a year and it is called the northern Ontario regional council. Ostensibly these councils are designed to plan, to co-ordinate, to integrate, to direct research and generally carry out purposes not unlike those that are set out in this measure, particularly under this area development section.
My impression of these regional councils in Ontario is that they are just a time-saving device and a receptacle for tremendous criticism. The regional units in Ontario, in an economic sense, that are dissatisfied I believe would pile up in areas such as southern Ontario, northeastern Ontario, north central Ontario, northwestern Ontario and eastern Ontario. These economic regions are being palmed off again with what I would call a substitute for real action, in these cases with regional economic councils.
I can make this point best from the northern Ontario council which seems to be headed by a fellow who is an executive with the steel company in Sault Ste Marie. It has a lumberman from Port Arthur on it, a Conservative local politician from Fort William and somebody from the Timmins area, and these people get together on the odd occasion a couple of times a year and talk about the things they would like to have. I nearly fell over when I heard the first study they got under way had to do with ways of developing better air service into northern Ontario. This almost seems fruitless when you consider the number of air licensed
1862	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department carriers we have. The men who make up that council are decent people and fine citizens, but they are in no position to give very much time or energy to the area development agency. In addition, so far as northern Ontario is concerned this is far too big an area. It is not a natural economic unit.
I can illustrate this in a number of ways. The relationship between an area such as Sudbury and North Bay, or Timmins and Kirkland Lake to Kenora, Fort William and Port Arthur is quite distant, and this is what I am concerned about in this clause it gives us no hint as to what an area is going to be.
We had the ridiculous situation under the previous government, when the hon. member for Ontario was minister of labour and we were fiddling and fooling around to discover when an area would begin to qualify for certain kinds of assistance. As I remember, it was dependant on its unemployment index or the unemployment insurance statistics.
One of the things that is very apparent is that if we get area development councils, or area development boards that try to take in more than one natural economic unit, we will land in difficulty and trouble. Second, we have to work within the provincial boundaries.
I know the premier of Manitoba told me, about two months ago when I was interviewing him regarding the success of the Manitoba inquiry and the recommendations it made, that he was proud of it and he thought it was going to accomplish something; but it was very limited. The first limit on the economic development that could take place with the Manitoba agency was just the mere fact that it did not have the resource, the power or the framework which the premier said he really felt lay with the federal government.
The other point was in so far as the natural economic unit idea was concerned. In many ways Manitoba could be looked at as something distinct, if you looked northward running into its northern hinterland and its water and forest operations; but as a farm area many of its problems, in an economic sense, are co-ordinated and liaisoned, if you can put it that way, with the provinces to the west. Therefore he felt area development was never going to achieve what it could in Canada until we had a strong lead from the federal government. But here again it is hard to know geographically just how this area development thing can be nailed down and dove-tailed.
I know in our particular region we can see it with the operations of ARDA. At long last the provincial government in Ontario has begun to move on ARDA. They have a man, whose name I think is Herbert Crown, and his


job is to go around and work in various regions of the province to get ARDA projects under way, in co-operation with the federal authorities and with whatever local agencies can come in. Again it is a very long, slow and difficult process, and no one really seems to be sure where the initiative should come from in so far as a local region is concerned.
However, I could put this to the minister. He comes from a big metropolitan area, and coming from a big metropolitan area, whether you like it or not, this conditions your approach; just as coming from more distant areas such as the maritimes undoubtedly conditions your approach to the kind of organization you want to see. And one of the things I experienced in my own region is that it is almost impossible for an area that is distant from the biggest political centre of power, which in Ontario is Toronto and federally is Ottawa, to conceive and to take the initiative for grand designs for itself without a tremendous amount of leadership from either Toronto or Ottawa.
I feel this point I have is important for any consideration that should take place, not because I have it, but because I think it is an important point that an area development agency should not be a passive kind of agency such as has been created all too often under federal jurisdiction. That is obviously one of the troubles with ARDA. With the initiative being left to the province its success depends very much upon the regional and provincial leadership you get. When this is weak or insecure, and where you are unable to bridge the distance from the provincial capital to the areas where ARDA programs can do the most good, you do not get the creation of the kind of program that is necessary.
I noticed throughout this whole discussion, particularly since the bill was introduced, that our Conservative friends have been worried about its emphasis, as they see it, on planning, bureaucracy and that kind of thing. If anything, I am of the opinion that their fears are a little bit over-exaggerated from their own experience of creating statutes that fall into areas such as that-


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I wonder if the hon. member would allow me-


Douglas Mason Fisher: -and drive the boards to become the bureaucratic menaces that they seem to suggest.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Might I interrupt the hon. member for a moment and ask unanimous consent to sit a little while longer? If this were granted I think my colleague would like to propose two amendments which have been suggested and we might, in the interests of

progress, pass the bill tonight after the hon. member tor Port Arthur has finished.


Douglas Mason Fisher: With the prospect of getting through this bill, I am prepared to sit down right now.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The suggestion that we sit a little longer will depend on the nature of the amendments proposed by the minister.


George Clyde Nowlan: I also have some amendments that I propose to bring forward.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps we could all agree to have a look at the amendments. I think we are seeking to meet the general wishes of the house, and it would be a great convenience if my hon. friend's suggestion could be tried out for a little while.


George Clyde Nowlan: I would like to try it.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Does the committee give unanimous consent to sit beyond ten o'clock.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, we have stood clause 5 until such time as we could consider clause 15. It was suggested that there was some objection to these two clauses in relation to overlapping but that this objection could be removed if in the first line in clause 15 the words, "appoint advisers and" were removed, and it is moved by my colleague-


Herman Maxwell Batten: Order. Does the minister intend to move an amendment to clause 15?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Not yet, Mr. Chairman. I am just explaining. There would be a second amendment in relation to clause 8, which was also stood over, which would be to add the words, "notwithstanding anything contained in the Defence Production Act," as suggested by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. If these amendments were put forward it would be my hope we might be able to secure agreement on the whole bill.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I have no quarrel with the suggested amendments, though they have no relation to clause 9 which we have under discussion at the present time. A number of points were raised. I do not know what the feeling of other members is, but certainly I would like the minister to reply to some of the points made. I mention one specific point which I consider important. As I understand the clause as it is now drafted, the application of this provision to area development is confined exclusively to areas which the governor in council sees fit to designate as areas of high or chronic unemployment. While I would certainly urge that priority be given to those areas, I feel that the present drafting imposes a serious limitation on what might
4,	1363	1863
Establishment of Industry Department be done in the future or even at the present time. For example, the best way of dealing with the chronic unemployment situation might be to take special measures to develop an adjacent area where better economic opportunities exist. I should like to hear the minister's reaction to that.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: In order to qualify, the unemployment in an area must be exceptional in character. This does not necessarily mean there must be high unemployment, though as the Minister of Labour has pointed out it is the intention of the government to give first priority to areas of high unemployment. If and when we are successful in reducing high rates of unemployment in these critical areas, they could still qualify, I would suggest, under the term "exceptional nature". I believe the purpose the hon. member has in mind can be achieved without any change in the wording of the act.
I apologize for not offering specific comment on the other helpful suggestions made, but I am grateful for them and will give them most serious consideration.


Edward Nasserden: In my opinion the phrase "exceptional degree of unemployment" is too vague and its use would rule out the case put forward by the hon. member for Macleod and the other hon. member who has just spoken. I think it might well be changed.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall clause 9 carry?


Edward Nasserden: I should like the minister to tell us if he could change the wording to which I have referred.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I would be glad to look at it.
Clause 9 agreed to.
Clause 10 agreed to.
On clause 11-Powers of governor in council.


George Clyde Nowlan: On this clause I should like to draw to the attention of the minister a matter which I think deserves a little consideration. This provision gives the governor in council power to deal with such special measures as may be drafted to facilitate the economic development of any designated area. I certainly do not wish to hold up the committee tonight on any technical amendment, but what I am suggesting is that the hon. gentleman should insert at the beginning of clause 11 the words "subject to any existing law or statute". Then, any power which would be exercised would at least be in accord with any existing legislation. The clause is so widely drawn at present that this might not apply. I therefore suggest this amendment:
That clause 11 of Bill C-74 is hereby amended by inserting at the beginning of the first line thereof, the following:
"Subject to any existing law or statute."
1864	HOUSE OF
Establishment of Industry Department


Mr. Favreau:: I move:
That clause 11 of the bill be amended by inserting at the beginning, before the words "the governor in council" the following words:
"Subject to any existing statutory provision."


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is, perhaps, a little better drafted.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Does the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings accept this wording?


George Clyde Nowlan: I am very conciliatory tonight.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 11 as amended agreed to.
On clause 12-Establishment of area development agency.
George Clyde Nowlan: I have just drawn this to the attention of the Secretary of State. I am not moving any amendment but I am looking at the drafting of the clause, which says:
(1) There shall be established an area development agency under the direction of a commissioner for area development and a deputy commissionerand so on. In other words you have dual control. I doubt very much if that was the intention of the minister in giving instructions for the drafting of the clause. I think it would be better if you had the area development under the control of the commissioner. I have an amendment before me but I will not move it. Perhaps the seatmate of the Secretary of State would consider this. If the clause read-
-there shall be established an area development agency under the direction of a commissioner who, together with a deputy commissioner, shall be appointed by the governor in council-
-you have the two appointed, but have the area development under the control of a commissioner, rather than have it under the control of both of them. I think there is a dual control there which was not intended, and I suggest that the Solicitor General or someone could give some attention to a redrafting. Otherwise you will have to get both the commissioner and assistant commissioner to agree to everything, and I am sure that is not the intention.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Can we stand this clause for a couple of minutes while we try to implement this very useful suggestion?


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall the clause stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Clause 12 stands.
Clause 13 agreed to.
On clause 14-General authority of minister.


George Clyde Nowlan: Here again we are dealing with a provision which authorizes the minister to enter into an agreement with the provinces.


I wish to move, seconded by the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm, that subsection (b) be amended by inserting after the word "responsible", which is the last word in the subsection, the following: and any such agreement shall be laid upon the table of the House of Commons within fifteen days after the execution thereof if the House of Commons is in session: and if not, then 15 days after the opening of the next session of parliament.
What the amendment does in short is to provide that any agreement entered into, subject to the approval of the governor in council, shall be laid upon the table of the House of Commons within 15 days after the execution thereof if the House of Commons is in session, and if not then within 15 days thereafter.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would think there could not be the slightest possible objection to this particular provision because I can assure hon. members that there is no thought on the part of the government to entering into any secret agreement with any provincial government.


George Clyde Nowlan: I did not think there would be.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would hope that any agreement we make would be of the character that we would want to flaunt before the world and which we would be very glad to bring to the attention of parliament. Subject to my hon. friend from Papineau looking at the wording I think the government would be happy to look at the suggestion.


Hugh John Flemming: I should like to ask the minister whether in subsection
(a)	the question raised by the hon. member for Pictou as to the function of the Atlantic development board is not met. He asked about the functions performed in the Atlantic provinces and I am wondering whether subsection (a) would answer the question.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: While I have not entered into the duties and had an opportunity to explore the problem, I would think the Atlantic development board, with the particular responsibilities it has, is, in a sense, the area development agency for the maritimes, and that there would be of necessity a closer co-operation between the area development agency commissioner and his staff and the Atlantic development board. We would expect to exchange letters to that effect.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Is the committee ready for the question on the amendment?


John Whitney Pickersgill: There are just a couple of small verbal changes to be made.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I wonder whether one of the changes should not be to refer to "parliament" being in session.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is precisely what my hon. friend from Papineau is doing.


Guy Favreau: Mr. Chairman, I move:
That subsection (b) of clause 14 of Bill No. C-74 be amended by inserting after the word "and" the following words:
"-any such agreement shall be laid upon the table of the House of Commons within 15 days after the execution thereof if parliament is in session; and if not, then 15 days after the opening of the next session of parliament, and-"


Herman Maxwell Batten: Does the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings intend to withdraw his original amendment?


George Clyde Nowlan: Right.
Amendment (Mr. Nowlan) withdrawn.
Amendment (Mr. Favreau) agreed to.
Clause 14 as amended agreed to.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, could we call clause 5 along with clause 15, because these two were to be considered together.


Stanley Howard Knowles: How can we consider both together? One has been amended.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Let us deal with clause 15 first and then go to clause 5.
On clause 15-Appointment of advisers and advisory committees.


Guy Favreau: I move:
That the words "appoint advisers and" in the first and second lines of clause 15 of Bill No. C-74 be deleted.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 15 as amended agreed to.
Clauses 16 to 19 inclusive agreed to.
On clause 5-Temporary appointments.
Edward Nasserden: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to hold up clause 5, but before it carries I just want to say that I view with some misgivings this particular clause and think it would have been better if it had not been in the bill.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall clause 5 carry?
Clause 5 agreed to.
On clause 8-Minister to exercise and perform duties, powers and functions of Minister of Defence Production.


Guy Favreau: Mr. Chairman, I move that the following words be added at the end of clause 8 of Bill No. C-74:
;notwithstanding anything contained in the Defence Production Act.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I think that meets the point, Mr. Chairman.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall the amendment carry?
28902-5-119
4.	1963	1865
Establishment of Industry Department


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall the clause as amended carry?
Clause 8 as amended agreed to.
On clause 12-Establishment of area development agency.


Guy Favreau: Mr. Chairman, I move:
That subclause (1) of clause 12 of Bill No. C-74 be replaced by the following:
"There shall be established an area development agency under the direction of a commissioner for area development who, together with a deputy commissioner for area development, shall be appointed by the governor in council to hold office during pleasure."


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall the amendment carry?


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 12 as amended agreed to.
Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall the title carry?


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall the bill carry?


Gordon Minto Churchill: On division.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall I report the bill?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Chairman, just before the bill is carried I should like to express my intense appreciation of the extraordinary cooperation of the house in getting this bill through.


George Clyde Nowlan: It is not promised for the future, you know.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall I report the bill with amendments?
Bill reported, on division.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: When shall the bill be read a third time?


George Clyde Nowlan: Next sitting of the house.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the house would be agreeable to its being read the third time now, by leave?


Gordon Minto Churchill: No, Mr. Speaker. We have been very co-operative tonight and I am very helpful, but a bill that has been amended has to be reprinted anyway and has to be again submitted to the house at the next sitting.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is a perfectly reasonable position to take, Mr. Speaker, and I thank hon. gentlemen for the co-operation they have already given us.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: When shall the bill be read a third time? Next sitting of the house; agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.

Business of the House BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, has the house leader any information for us as to what may happen tomorrow?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, it will come as a great shock and surprise to the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre when I say that he has been so successful in suggesting business for the house that I intend to propose to the house another suggestion that he made to me, namely that instead of taking tomorrow the business which I suggested a week ago and again last night, we should take the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce.
I have consulted hon. gentlemen in the other parties in the house and I have also,
I need hardly add, consulted my colleague the hon. member for Eglinton, and I find there seems to be a general disposition to accept the suggestion of the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre. I trust that the progress which he forecast in making that suggestion to me, will actually be made by the committee tomorrow.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, the progress that I forecast is dependant upon two things; one is the attitude of the minister who will be taking his estimates through the house, and our hope that his colleagues will remain silent, particularly the Secretary of State.


[Stage Direction]
It being twenty eight minutes after ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Friday, July 5, 1963