1963-06-19

[Stage Direction]
Hon, Waller L. Gordon (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, certain administrative difficulties have arisen respecting the immediate application of the proposed 30 per cent tax on takeovers, announced in the budget speech on June 13. One of the difficulties is in connection with new financing now under way for the expansion of existing businesses. This cannot be allowed to lapse or be deferred until detailed regulations have been formulated.
It may take a little time to work out satisfactorily the difficulties referred to. Pending a solution, the government proposes to withdraw paragraph 11 of the budget resolution respecting the Excise Tax Act.
Since the budget was delivered I have had a number of conversations about this matter with people familiar with the administrative side of the securities business, including the presidents of the Toronto and Montreal stock exchanges, and a senior officer of the investment dealers' association of Canada. I have also heard by telegram from the president of the Vancouver stock exchange. Most of the people I have talked with have pointed out the administrative difficulties I have referred to, but are anxious to find a solution that will be consistent with the government's statement of disapproval of takeovers of Canadian concerns by non-residents.
This attitude is not shared by the president of the Montreal stock exchange. In a letter to me dated June 18 he states that "a nonresident takeover confers great benefits on the Canadian economy". Either before or just after an interview with me yesterday, and without informing me of his intention to take such action, the president of the Montreal stock exchange handed copies of his letter to members of the press. The letter is intemperate and irresponsible in tone and content.
Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Gordon:: It is a strange communication coming as it does from a man who holds the position of president of an important Canadian stock exchange. I want to make it clear 28902-5-85
that this government disagrees completely with the interpretation of the national interest expressed by the president of the Montreal stock exchange. Our attitude to the desirability of maintaining and increasing Canadian ownership of Canadian assets was clearly set out in the budget speech. It remains unchanged.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that there was reference to a letter which apparently contains some very interesting statements, would the minister table that letter so those of us who have not been privileged to read it with the same care that he has might have the same opportunity?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: I will be glad to table the letter, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquiilam):: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the letter was commented upon by the minister under motions, which seems to me a rather questionable procedure, I suggest that the letter be included in Hansard as an appendix.


Mr. Speaker:: Is that agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: For letter referred to above, see appendix "A".]



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. Howard: 1.	Since January 1, 1960, has any property been purchased for a post office at Manotick, Ontario, and, if so, what was (a) the date of the purchase (b) the acreage involved (c) the name and address of the person from whom the property was purchased (d) the purchase price and (e) the method by which the purchase price was agreed upon?
2.	Were any recommendations made by the village of Manotick regarding other locations for the post office, and, if so, what consideration, if any, was given to these recommendations?
3.	Were any other locations considered by the government and, if so (a) what were these other locations and (b) what value or price was attached to each such location?
4.	Has the government any knowledge of the value of comparable pieces and areas of property at Manotick and, if so, what are the details of this
knowledge?
5.	Has the government any knowledge of the length of time which the person referred to in part (c) of paragraph 1 was in possession of the

Questions
property and the price which he originally paid for it and, if so, what are the details of this knowledge?
6.	Does the government own or have control over, rights-of-way or other means of access to the post office and, if so, what are the names, lengths, widths, directions, and other details relating to any streets or roads comprising such, and how far is the terminus thereof from the old highway 16 or the Main street of Manotick?
7.	Does the government have any plans to procure a more direct route from the terminus of its present rights-of-way as referred to in part 6 hereof and the old highway 16 and, if so, what are these plans?


Mr. Deschaielets:: 1. No; (a) a site was purchased on October 14, 1959; (b) 0.49 acre; (c) William David Watson, Manotick, Ontario; (d) $4,000; (e) by negotiation and under special conditions by which the vendor agreed to provide right of way, construct partial access road, drainage ditches and culverts. The vendor also constructed an 300 foot sidewalk from the post office site to the main highway No. 16.
2.	Yes, a councillor of the village suggested a property on Maple avenue. This was considered and rejected by postal officials.
3. Yes,
(a) Location	(b) Value
On highway 16 between Bridge and Hill sts.	$30,000
One block off highway 16 adjacent to the Royal bank	$15,500
Part block "D" west of Anne street.	$4,000
(a)	Location	(b) Value
On county road (Maple No price avenue) near bridge.	quoted.
4.	Residential lots surrounding subject property are priced at $3,000 to $4,500. Part block "D" west of Anne street was sold for $4,000.
5.	No, the department has no definite knowledge on this.
6.	The department holds a right of way, 66 feet in width by approximately 280 feet in length, from the south line of Anne street to the south boundary of the post office site. The distance from the northern end of this right of way to highway 16 is approximately 250 feet. The road between the north end of our right of way and highway 16 has been in existence and used by the public for some years. It is privately owned by Mr. Watson but is encumbered at the present time by rights of way to two owners of abutting properties, which provides access to the post office site.
7.	Not at present.


REVENUE FROM CIGARETTES AND TOBACCO
Mr. Scott: 1.	What is the total amount received by the government, per year, from taxes on cigarettes, tobacco, cigars, etc.?
2.	Does the government make any grants to foster research into the relationship, if any, between cigarette smoking and lung cancer and, if so, what is the amount of each such grant, to whom is it made, and when were such grants first made?


Mr. Dupuis:: 1. Federal taxes on cigarettes, cigars, tobacco (raw leaf and manufactured):
Fiscal	Year,	Mar.	31, 1959	I960	1961	1962
(thousands of dollars)
Excise	taxes	147,996	185,502	193,649	207,551Excise	duties	141,201	146,176	149,658	160,519Total <l>	289,197	331,678 343,307 368,070
d>
Drawbacks and refunds have not been deducted. Excludes customs import duties, revenue from the general sales tax and from income taxes on corporations and individuals engaged in the production of tobacco products, etc.
Source: Public accounts of Canada.	________________
2.	Not directly. However funds are provided by the Department of National Health and Welfare through the national health grants to the national cancer institute and to the Ontario cancer treatment and research foundation for cancer research. In addition, the Department of National Health and Welfare has carried out a six year study of mortality in relation to smoking habits. A preliminary report of this study was made in 1960 and a second report in May of this year. A final report will be prepared at a later date.


R.C.A.F. PILOT TRAINING ORGANIZATION
Mr. Siefanson: 1.	Has the R.C.A.F. completed its study of the training organization both ground and air, and, if so, has it submitted a report to the Minister of National Defence?
2.	If the report has been received, what changes if any, are contemplated at the following pilot training operation bases: Gimli, Manitoba; Portage la Prairie, Manitoba; Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan; and Penhold, Alberta?
3.	At present, what is the role of each of these bases in the R.C.A.F. pilot training program?

4.	What is the present strength of each of these bases, number of service personnel and number of
civilian employees?
5.	What is the number and type of aircraft at each of these bases?
6.	What improvements are at present under construction at these bases, with estimated cost of each; and what further improvements have been recommended, and when will these be implemented?


Mr. Hellyer:: 1. Based on the planned use of the basic jet training aircraft (the "Tutor"), a review has been completed of air training facilities and the minister advised of the conclusions.
2.	Final decisions have not been taken.
3.	Gimli: Central flying school No. 3 advanced flying school; Portage la Prairie: Advanced flying instructors school No. 2 advanced flying school; Moose Jaw: No. 2 flying training school Basic flying instructors school; Penhold: No. 4 flying training school.
4.	There are approximately 650 service and approximately 200 civilian personnel at each of these stations.
5.	Gimli: 2 Harvard, 39 T-33, 5 Expeditor, 2 Dakota, and 2 Chipmunk; Portage la Prairie: 75 T-33, and 2 Expeditor; Moose Jaw: 64 Harvard, and 9 Expeditor; Penhold: 64 Harvard, and 3 Expeditor.
6.	Under construction.
Moose Jaw: runways, $3,300,000.
Programmed for 1963-64.
Moose Jaw: Runways, $300,000; TACAN installation, $20,000; fuel facilities, $123,700; variable approach indicator system, $100,000.
Penhold: Runways, $50,000; visual approach indicator system, $100,000.
Portage la Prairie: Variable approach indicator system, $100,000.


PUBLICATION OF PARLIAMENTARY GUIDE
Mr. MacRae: Is any grant made from public funds toward the cost of publication of the Canadian Parliamentary
Members
F.	W. Sheppard
G.	Twiss
F. A. Coulthard
North Fraser harbour commissioners Members
H.	C. Cunningham
S. Chambers J. A. Lindsay J. S. Alsbury W. J. Cook 28902-5-85J
Questions
Guide and, if so (a) to whom, and what amount (b) does the government accept any responsibility for the accuracy of this publication?


Yvon Dupuis: No.


SECOND FERRY SERVICE, NOVA SCOTIA-MASSACHUSETTS
Mr. Crouse: Has the government of Canada given any consideration to the need for establishing a second ferry service between Nova Scotia and Massachusetts and, if so (a) what is the size of the contemplated ferry, and the number of cars and passengers it will carry (b) what are the names of the ports to be used in Nova Scotia and Massachusetts?


Mr. Caniin:: In response to representations received, investigation was made earlier into a possible ferry service between Nova Scotia and Massachusetts, and this indicated that the proposed service would not be economically justified.


FRASER RIVER HARBOUR BOARDS
Mr. Basford: With respect to the Fraser river, B.C., (a) what harbour boards have jurisdiction thereover (b) what are their respective areas of jurisdiction (c) what are the names and addresses of the members of any such boards (d) what are the dates of appointment of such members (e) what is the term for which each member is appointed?


Jean-Charles Cantin: (a) New Westminster harbour commissioners and north Fraser harbour commissioners.
(b)	New Westminster harbour commissioners-The Fraser river from Kanaka creek to the strait of Georgia, including the Pitt river to Pitt lake and excluding the north arm, Fraser river, west of Poplar island.
North Fraser harbour commissioners-The north arm of the Fraser river west of Poplar island to the strait of Georgia.
(c)	New Westminster harbour commissioners
Address
New Westminster harbour commissioners, 713 Columbia street,
New Westminster, B.C.
Address
North Fraser harbour commissioners, Oak street wharf, foot Oak street south,
Vancouver 14, B.C.
It
((



Questions
(d)	and (e) F. W. Sheppard: appointed December 17, 1958, no specific term; G. Twiss: appointed December 17, 1958, no specific term; F. H. Coulthard: appointed February 10, 1959, term 3 years and eligible for reappointment; H. C. Cunningham: appointed November 3, 1955, no specific term; S. Chambers: appointed February 2, 1961, no specific term; J. A. Lindsay: appointed June 11, 1952, no specific term; J. S. Alsbury: appointed June 11, 1952, no specific term; W. J. Cook: appointed August 7, 1956, term 3 years and eligible for reappointment.


MOUNTED POLICE QUARTERS, PUGWASH, N.S.
Mr. Coates: When will tenders be called for the construction of R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at Pugwash, Nova Scotia?


Mr. Macdonald:: Tenders were called and closed on May 23, 1963.
(Translation):


QUEEN ELIZABETH HOTEL, MONTREAL
Mr. Loiselle: 1.	What was the cost of construction of the Queen Elizabeth hotel in Montreal?
2.	What contract exists between the Canadian National Railways and the Hilton company?
3.	When will that contract expire?
4.	Is the Hilton company a party to that contract incorporated in Canada and, if so, in what year did the incorporation take place?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
1.	Construction cost of building was $20,871,891.
2.	An agreement was entered into with Hilton of Canada Ltd. in 1954 for the management and operation of the hotel.
3.	1973.
4.	Yes, 1954.
(Text):


LOW POWER REPEATER TYPE STATION COST
Mr. Fisher: 1.	In establishing low power repeater type stations, what per capita cost formula does the C.B.C. use?
2.	What is the per capita cost for establishment, and for service, for each of the present or planned LPRT stations?
3.	What is the C.B.C.'s estimated per capita cost to establish and service a LPRT station in Mani-touwadge, in Terrace Bay and in Pickle Crow?


Yvon Dupuis: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows:
1.	The per capita cost formula is based on the annual operating cost in relation to population situated within the proposed coverage area. Dominion bureau of statistics census figures are used to estimate the population. [Mr. Cantin.l
2.	There are 100 LPRT's in operation across Canada at present, some of them established over 15 years ago. Detailed per capita cost information on all these stations is not immediately available and to obtain it would require a large expenditure of man hours by the corporation.
A further 89 possible LPRT locations have been given preliminary study as part of the corporation's future planning. The corporation feels that it would be misleading to make the per capita estimates for these locations public as the list is a tentative one and subject to substantial modification in the light of changing conditions and further study. To spell out in detail a list which is intended for general planning purposes only would give an impression of finality in planning which is not justified and which, further, by appearing to be a commitment could limit the corporation's freedom to adapt to the changing conditions already mentioned.
Generally it can be said that the estimated annual cost per capita ranges from less than 25 cents for the early established stations to over $30 for the most costly of the 89 possible locations, the amount being chiefly determined by the cost involved to provide for the transmission of the network program service.
3.	Manitouwadge-A low power transmitter has been authorized and will begin operation at Manitouwadge, late this year. The estimated per capita cost is $1.73.
Terrace Bay-The corporation has no per capita cost estimated for this location as it is included in the anticipated coverage area of a new LPRT of increased power that will be installed at Schreiber, Ontario shortly.
Pickle Crow-This area is included in the long range coverage planning program. The corporation's position with respect to disclosure of estimated per capita cost is explained in (2) above.


C.B.C. TELEVISION PER CAPITA COST FIGURES
Mr. Fisher: 1.	At the present time, what is the C.B.C.'s estimated per capita cost figure to supply television service to the Geraldton-Longlac area, to Horne-payne, to Terrace Bay-Schreiber, to Manitouwadge, or any other estimates relating to one or combinations of these areas?
2.	How do these estimates compare with estimates of costs for stations being presently established by the C.B.C.?


Yvon Dupuis: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows. 1. It would be misleading to make public estimated per capita cost figures for locations that are still in the initial planning stage. Alternative plans for the areas in question have been studied, and are still under study, in an attempt to find a solution which would bring the per capita cost down to a lower figure.

Until studies are complete and estimates are final, the corporation feels it would not be desirable to make public preliminary estimates of per capita costs.
2.	The cost estimates of the plans studied are appreciably higher than those of stations at present being established.
(Translation):


MARINE TERMINAL, QUEBEC CITY
Mr. Beaule: 1.	What is the amount of the successful tender for the construction of the Champlain marine terminal at Quebec city?
2.	Who submitted tenders, and what was the amount in each case?
3.	Among the tendering firms, which were from Quebec city?
4.	If the contract has been awarded, what is the name of the contractor?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: It is assumed that the work referred to is the marine agency wharf of the Department of Transport, next to Champlain street.
1.	The lowest tender was submitted by Messrs. Dimock and Albert, Quebec city, Que. in the amount of $252,565, but no contract has yet been awarded.
2.	Dimock & Albert, Quebec, Que., $252,565.00; McNamara Marine Ltd., Toronto, Ont., $267,456.88; Les Constructions du Saint-Laurent Limitee, Villeneuve, Que., $294,476.25; Royalmount Construction Ltd., Montreal, Que., $347,702.50.
3.	Dimock & Albert, 2974 Larochelle, Quebec city.
4.	N/A.


C.N.R. BUILDING, QUEBEC CITY
Mr. Beaule: 1.	What is the name of the general contractor who is now building the Canadian National building in Quebec city?
2.	What amount did he tender?
3.	Who are the subcontractors?
4.	How many are from Quebec city?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
1.	E. G. M. Cape & Co. Ltd., Montreal.
2.	Tender prices are not made a matter of public record. The company's estimate of the completed building is approximately $700,000.00.
3.	and 4. Selection, if any, of subcontractors is a matter for the general contractor.


NEW POST OFFICE BUILDING, QUEBEC CITY
Mr. Beaule: 1.	What was the amount of the tender for the construction of the new post office building in Quebec city?
Questions
2.	What was the total cost of construction when completed?
3.	How many subcontractors were used, and who
were they?
4.	How many subcontractors were from Quebec
city?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. $3,059,092.
2.	Final payment has not been made yet.
3.	28 as follows:
Michaud & Simard Inc., Quebec, Que.; Parco Drilling & Exploration Co. Ltd., Montreal, Que.; Harris Steel Corporation, Lachine, Que.; Armstrong Contracting Can. Ltd., Montreal, Que.; Eastern Canada Steel & Iron Works Ltd., Quebec, Que.; D. Larue Ltee, Quebec, Que.; Adru Granite Inc., Montreal, Que.; Missisquoi Stone & Marble Corp., Philipsburg, Que.; Adelard Marchand Ltee., Quebec, Que.; Gerco Metal Ltee, Quebec, Que.; Adelard Laberge Ltee, Quebec, Que.; A. St-Germain & Fils Inc., St. Hyacinthe, Que.; Stucco, Latte & Platre (Que.) Inc., Quebec, Que.; Cie de Carrelages de Quebec Ltee, Quebec; Que.; Provincial Flooring Co., Quebec, Que.; Dominion Acoustic Tile Ltd., Montreal, Que.; Antonio Bureau Ltee, Quebec, Que.; National Scale & Equipment Ltd., Montreal, Que.; Anjou Steel Co., Ltd., Montreal, Que.; Montreal Metal Works Products, Montreal, Que.; Ambassador Sales (Que.) Inc., Quebec, Que.; Otis Elevator Co. Ltd., Quebec, Que.; J.-L. Demers Ltee, Quebec, Que.; Canadian Pittsburg Industries Ltd., Quebec, Que.; Dougall Painting & Contracting Co. Ltd., Montreal, Que.; Les Accessoires de Cuisine Ltee, Quebec, Que.; J. Lewin & Co. Ind., Montreal, Que.; Franqo Incorporated, Quebec, Que.
4.	16.
(Text):


INVESTIGATIONS UNDER COMBINES ACT
Mr. Mather: 1.	How many investigations have there been under the Combines Investigation Act in the last five years?
2.	How many of these have resulted in prosecution and/or fines?
3.	What was the amount of the fine, and the
name of the firm, in each case?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: 1. 156.*
2. 20.**
3-	Amount
Firms, Corporations or	Individuals	of Fine
Electrical Contractors Association of
Ontario	$ 7,500
Clarence William Dent	7,500
Lyons Fuel Hardware and Supplies
Limited	4,000
Questions

Amount
Firms, Corporations or Individuals of Fine McMaster Fuels Limited	8,000
Soo Falls Brewing Company Limited 3,500 Eddie Black's Limited	1,800
Ultra Opti-Kon Limited	350
Frederick's Department Store Limited	100
Mitchell Photo Supply Ltd.	50
Ace Liquidators Limited	300
Kralinator Filter Limited	1,500
Atlantic Sugar Refineries Limited (now Acadia-Atlantic Sugar Company Limited)	25,000
Canada and Dominion Sugar Company Limited	25,000
St. Lawrence Sugar Refineries Limited	25,000
Tibor Feurstein	75
In five cases the charges are laid but have not yet come to trial and in two cases acquittals are under appeal by the crown.
* This is for the period commencing with the fiscal year 1958-59 and ending with the fiscal year 1962-63 and includes inquiries already in progress at the beginning of the fiscal year 1958-59 and inquiries still in progress at the end of the fiscal year 1962-63.
** Includes cases where charges laid but have not yet come to trial and cases where counsel habe been instructed to proceed and charges not yet laid but does not include cases where counsel have been instructed to proceed pursuant to section 31(2) of the act for an order of prohibition only.


REPATRIATION OF CONSTITUTION
Mr. Brewin: 1.	What steps, if any, have been taken or are contemplated with the view to having the constitution of Canada repatriated so that it can be fully amended within Canada?
2.	Have any steps been taken or are they contemplated, to reconvene a conference of the attorneys general of the various provinces and the Minister of Justice with a view to working out a procedure for repatriation of the constitution?
3.	What steps, if any, have been taken to secure the views of other qualified organizations or individuals with a view to the repatriation of the constitution?
4.	Has consideration been given by the government of Canada to incorporating within any proposed amendment of the constitution a constitutional bill of rights which would be binding on legislative authorities?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: 1. None by the present government.
2.	No steps have yet been taken, and if and when it is decided to do so, the government will so indicate in due course.
3.	None by the present government.
4.	Not by the present government.


CANADIAN IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION
Mr. Roxburgh: 1.	What was the number of immigrants to Canada for the years 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1959, 1960, and 1961?
2.	What was the number of Canadians emigrating to other countries over the same periods?
3.	What was the number of Canadians emigrating to the United States over the same periods?


Yvon Dupuis: 1. Information published in annual report, Department of Citizenship and Immigration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1962, Table No. 3 page 49.
2.	and 3. Emigration from Canada 19551961:
Year	Total	Emigration to
	Emigration <u	United States <2>
1955	62,848	37,2061956	67,005	44,0611957	73,829	50,0571958	62,711	35,6871959	68,647	41,3951960	74,988	48,6821961	70,553	45,209
H>
Estimated.
<2) Source: Immigration and naturalization service United States department of justice.
(Translation):


NEW POST OFFICES, PONTIAC-TEMISCAMINGUE CONSTITUENCY
Mr. Marlineau: How many post offices does the Department of Public Works intend to build within the constituency of Pontiac-Temiscamingue in the course of the current fiscal year?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: A new post office is almost completed at Notre Dame du Nord and it will be occupied in the near future.
The possibility of building a post office at Guigues is under consideration.
(Text):


INDIAN CLAIMS COMMISSION
Mr. Willoughby: Is consideration being given to the early establishment of an Indian claims commission so that the Indian peoples can have a court for the hearing of their problems?


Mr. Favreau:: As I indicated in the house on June 12 in answer to a similar question by the hon. member for Skeena, the question of what method might be used for the settlement of the claims of Indians is one of government policy which will be announced in due course.


ADVISERS TO CANADIAN FISHERIES DELEGATION
Mr. Mather: 1.	Were Mr. Koshe and Mr. Giske of the special committee advising the Canadian fisheries delegation in Washington actually in Washington during the fishing conference with Japan last week?

2.	Were they consulted before the Canadian delegation left for Washington?


Mr. Robichaud:: 1. Mr. Koshe, no; Mr. Giske, yes.
2. Mr. Koshe, no. He left New Westminster for halibut fishing on March 28, 1963. He landed catch from his first trip in Alaska. He was contacted there by telephone on June 6. He flew from Alaska to Washington via Seattle and arrived in Washington on June 11.
Mr. Giske, yes.


HEATING SYSTEM, PENITENTIARY FOR WOMEN
Mr. Matheson: 1.	Have any complaints been received respecting the heating system of the penitentiary for women and, if so, in what years, and when?
2.	Have investigations been conducted respecting said heating system?
3.	What repairs or improvements, if any, to said heating system are being undertaken or within contemplation?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: 1. Yes, during the heating seasons 1961-62 and 1962-63.
2.	Yes, investigations have been conducted by the engineering staff of the penitentiary service and by the architectural and engineering staff of the Department of Public Works.
3.	To improve the heating facilities, some alterations have been made and others are at present being carried out to the steam service lines. Adjustments have been made to the heating equipment controls. Old ill fitting wooden sash have been replaced with steel sash in the cell block and are at present being replaced in other areas.
A thorough engineering survey of the heating and ventilating of the buildings is in hand by the Department of Public Works. It is intended that additional improvements as are indicated by the survey will be effected prior to the commencement of the heating season 1963-64.


AIDS TO NAVIGATION, LAKE WINNIPEG AND RED RIVER
Mr. Slefanson: 1.	What improvements were implemented on lake Winnipeg and the Red river in Manitoba under the aids to navigation program during the years 1960, 1961, and 1962, and what was the cost each year?
2.	What is the aids to navigation program scheduled for lake Winnipeg and the Red river, for 1963, and the estimated cost?


Jean-Charles Cantin: 1. (a) Improvements in aids to navigation in Manitoba were carried out as follows for the calendar years listed below:-
Lake Winnipeg, 1960:
1.	Gull harbour, 4 sets of beacon ranges established.
2.	Spider island, lighted buoy established.
Questions
3.	Hnausa reef, lighted buoy established.
4.	Icelandic river, light established.
5.	McBeth point, entrance to Kinwow bay, light established.
6.	North Sandy island, light structure renewed.
7.	Victoria beach, light altered.
8.	Pine dock, light established.
9.	Winnipeg beach, light established.
Lake Winnipegosis:
1.	Mapes reef, lighted buoy established.
Lake Winnipeg, 1961:
1.	Barrel rock, light structure renewed.
2.	Berens river, 2 sets of range lights established.
3.	Black island, spar buoy established.
4.	Ironwood point, light established.
5.	Saskatchewan river, 2 lighted buoys established.
6.	Pearson reef, lighted buoy established.
7.	Poplar point reef, light structure renewed.
8.	Whiteway point, light established.
Lake Winnipegosis:
1.	Shoal river, range lights established.
2.	Cormorant island, light established.
3.	Devils island, light established.
Lake Winnipeg, 1962:
1.	Red river, a new type of spar buoy with scotchlite reflector was installed to replace older types of spar buoys.
2.	St. Andrew lock, lighted buoy established.
3.	Red river forks, new light established.
4.	Whiteway point, light altered.
5.	Barrel rock, light altered-day beacon improved.
6.	Bullhead point, light relocated.
7.	Black Bear, light improved.
8.	Big Black river, radar reflector installed on buoy.
9.	Winnipeg river, six spar buoys established.
10.	Warren's landing, range beacons were rebuilt.
11.	Bloodvein river, light established.
12.	Lake Winnipeg buoys, radar reflectors were placed on all lighted buoys.
Lake Manitoba:
1. Oak point, light established.
(b)	The expenditures in connection with the aids to navigation service were as follows for the fiscal years indicated.
Maintenance	Capital
and	Expenditures
Operation for improvements
1959- 60	$25,323	$ 2,7241960-	61	26,612	6,7271961-	62	33,115	12,0351962-	63	30,730	6,589
Questions
2.	The following are the improvements in aids to navigation proposed to be carried out in 1963 in the lake Winnipeg-lake Win-nipegosis-Red river area.
Lake Winnipeg:
1.	Alter lighted buoy off Long point.
2.	Alter light at the Narrows.
3.	Establish light at Tamarac island.
4.	Establish lighted buoy at Big Black river.
5.	Establish light on Pelican island.
6.	Establish range lights into Loon straits.
7.	Improve day ranges into Poplar point.
8.	Alter light at the mouth of the Red river.
Lake Winnipegosis:
1.	Establish 2 sets of range lights in the Papoose channel.
2.	Establish 6 unlighted buoys in Papoose channel.
The cost of the above improvements is estimated to be around $15,200 for capital expenditures.
In addition, it is proposed to construct a new agency office, stores and shop building in Selkirk for an estimated amount of $18,000. This will greatly improve the existing facilities at the marine depot.


C.B.C. RADIO STATION, FREDERICTON, N.B.
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 431
Mr. MacRae:: Is it the intention to proceed with the construction of a C.B.C. radio station in Fredericton this year and, if so (a) at what stage are the plans at present (b) what is the estimated cost?


Yvon Dupuis: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows. Yes. (a) Negotiations with suppliers of technical equipment are under way. Tenders for transmitter building will be called shortly, (b) For the transmitter and studios over-all estimate of capital cost (land, building and equipment) is $502,750.
(Translation):


*REPENTIGNY, QUE., DREDGING
Mr. Pigeon: 1.	Do the estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1964, include an item of $200,000 for the digging of a channel this year at Repentigny?
2.	Does the Department of Public Works intend to undertake this work this year and, if not, for what reason?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Speaker, the answer is as follows:
1.	Yes.
2.	No. Since the tabling of the budget, an investigation made recently has shown that traffic will not be so heavy as previously anticipated. So the high cost of that project would not be justified at the present time.
[Mr. Cantin.l
(Text):


TESTS FOR STRONTIUM 90 AND IODINE 131
Mr. Cameron (Nanaimo-: Cowichan-The Islands):
1.	What period elapses between sampling of milk by the Department of National Health and Welfare and publication of levels of strontum 90?
2.	Are analyses made on pooled samples and, if so, what steps are taken to detect very "hot" lots of milk?
3.	Are the results of testing for iodine 131 forwarded to medical health authorities before the strontium 90 results are obtainable as a warning of possible strontium 90 levels?


Mr. Haidasz:: 1. The regular monthly reports of the Department of National Health and Welfare are published six to seven weeks after the month in which the samples are taken.
2.	Yes, at each sampling station three samples a week are obtained from among the dairies supplying the area and a pooled sample is analysed each month for strontium 90. Strontium 90 levels within a particular sampling area do not show local variations of such magnitude as to require the separate testing of individual lots of milk.
3.	Iodine 131 tests are carried out weekly and the results are sent to the provincial health departments immediately. However a high level of iodine 131 does not indicate that a high level of strontium 90 is to be expected.
(Translation):



MONTREAL


[Stage Direction]
Question No. 442
Mr. Valade:: Has the Postmaster General given instructions to any official in his department regarding the method of employment of temporary or supernumerary employees, at Montreal or elsewhere and, if so, what is the nature of such instructions?


Mr. Denis:: No.
(Text):



FARM LOAN APPLICATIONS, CHAPLEAU CONSTITUENCY

Mr. Laprise: 1.	How many applications for farm loans were received from residents of the constituency of Chapleau in 1962 and 1963?
2.	Of these numbers (a) how many were approved
(b)	what was the amount of each loan approved?


Mr. Beer:: The Farm Credit Corporation does not maintain statistical records on a constituency basis. However, the municipal counties of Abitibi East and Abitibi West approximately coincide with the constituency of Chapleau, and the answer is as follows:
1.	1962, Abitibi East-nil; Abitibi West- nil. 1963, Abitibi East-nil; Abitibi West-7.
2.	(a) 1962, Abitibi East-nil; Abitibi West -nil. 1963, Abitibi East-nil; Abitibi West-7 in process.

(b) 1962, Abitibi East-nil; Abitibi West- nil. 1963, Abitibi East, nil; Abitibi West, 7 loans are in process but have not as yet been approved.



ENCOURAGEMENT OF BEEF CATTLE RAISING, CHAPLEAU CONSTITUENCY

Mr. Laprise: 1.	Does the government contribute in any way to beef cattle raising in the province of Quebec?
2.	If so (a) since when (b) what is the amount of its contribution (i) for Quebec (ii) for the constituency of Chapleau?
3.	Are tests being carried out for possible encouragement of beef cattle raising in the constituency of Chapleau and, if so (a) where (b) who is responsible for these tests (c) what results have been obtained to date?


Bruce Silas Beer: 1. Yes. The government operates the following policies that are designed to contribute to beef cattle improvement in the province of Quebec.
(a)	Sire loan policy (bull loaning policy).
Under this policy, bulls are available on
loan to groups of farmers who have been officially organized as bull loaning associations consisting of not less than three members.
(b)	Record of performance for beef cattle.
A joint federal-provincial program designed
to provide purebred beef breeders with a herd test that will facilitate "within herd" improvement based on individual performance of animals in the herd, which in turn will have an influence on the quality of the breeding stock of the commercial cattle industry.
(c)	Beef carcass grading.
Government inspectors grade beef carcasses on request at all federally inspected plants across Canada. These carcass grades may be used as a basis of settlement between producer and processor. Carcass grading can indirectly influence the quality and conformation of beef cattle and consequently can assist producers to market a quality product.
In addition experiments conducted at the Lennoxville, the Ste. Anne de la Pocatiere and the Normandin experimental farms are providing new information on forage crop varieties, and pasture and hay crop management which is basic to the production of feed to maintain a beef cattle industry.
2. (a) (1) Records indicate that the bull loaning policy has operated continuously in the province of Quebec since 1914.
(2)	The record of performance for beef cattle program has been in operation since 1956 with only one purebred herd in Quebec participating to date.
(3)	The beef grading policy was inaugurated in 1929.
(4)	The experimental farm at Lennoxville was established in 1914.
Questions
(b) (1) (a) bull loaning policy operations in the province of Quebec 1914-1962:
No. Bulls
Breed	Placed	Total costAberdeen-Angus	31	$ 13,149.00Hereford	134	$ 47,165.00Shorthorn	738	$162,677.00903	$222,991.002. (b) (1) (a) Total number of bulls	loan in the province	of Quebec at June	1963:	Dairy	70Beef	35Total	105(b)	With only one Quebec herd participating in the record of performance beef program at the present time, the cost is negligible.(c)	The actual costs of the various grading programs are not identifiable, but the estimated cost of the beef grading program in Quebec for 1962 is $40,000.(d)	That portion of the cost of the research program which is directed toward beef cattle, as such is, not identifiable.
(2) Records do not show bull placements by constituency but as far as can be determined no beef bulls have been placed in the constituency of Chapleau since 1955. The cost of the other programs, insofar as they benefit beef cattle raising, are not identifiable by constituencies.
3.	No tests are being carried out for the specific purpose of encouraging beef cattle production in the constituency of Chapleau. The information available as a result of experimental work conducted in connection with beef cattle is available to all; it is particularly available to provincial agronomes, and through them to all farmers in Quebec. (Translation):



C.N.R.-TERM OF OFFICE OF PRESIDENT

Mr. Valade: Does the government intend to renew the term of office of the president of Canadian National Railways, Mr. Donald Gordon, at the expiration of his present appointment?


Jean-Charles Cantin: Details of Mr. Donald Gordon's appointment as president and of his appointment as a director and chairman of the Canadian National Railway Company were given in the reply made on June 5, 1963, to a question on the order paper (Hansard, page 678).
Any announcement in this matter will be made in the usual manner.
Questions

(Text):



GASPE RAIL LINE

Mr. Fisher: 1.	Has the government received any new data on cost estimates for its railroad planned in the Gaspe since the enabling legislation was passed?
2.	If so, in what ways have the original estimates presented to the house been altered?
3.	What agency, using what survey methods, developed the more recent cost data?
4.	Has there been any reappraisal of the revenue prospects of this projected railroad and, if so, how many years will it take before the estimated annual revenue meets both operating and capital cost debt charges?
5.	Is the government considering the question of not going ahead with the railroad and, if so, when does it expect to make the decision?


Jean-Charles Cantin: 1. Yes.
2.	Materials increase in costs.
3.	The Canadian National Railways, using its standard techniques for preliminary field survey.
4.	Yes; not in the immediately foreseeable future.
5.	Matters involved are under government consideration.



CHEESE EXPORTS AND IMPORTS

Mr. Prillie: 1.	What quantities of Canadian cheese were exported to the United States for the years 1959, 1960, 1961, and 1962, and what was the dollar value for these amounts for each year?
2.	What quantities of cheese were imported into Canada from the United States in 1959, 1960, 1961, and 1962, and what was the dollar value of these quantities for each year?
3.	Are negotiations now being carried on with the United States with a view to increasing the quantities of Canadian cheese which may be imported into the United States?


Mr. Pepin:: 1 and 2. Exports and imports of cheese between Canada and the United States in the years 1959-1962 were as follows:
Domestic Exports	Re-Exports	ImportsYear	Lb.	Value	Lb.	Value	Lb.	Value1959	447,500	$233,423	24,900	$15,098	1,561,671	$ 860,0381960	624,000	343,271	59,600	21,272	1,369,480	902,4051961	607,200	312,578	12,200	9,477	1,779,053	1,143,2941962	566,200	311,870	14,500	8,047	1,718,007	1,143,0523.	Since 1951, Canadian Cheddar cheese imports into the United States have been restricted by an import quota of 500,000 pounds per annum.
The government has already had discussions on this subject with United States authorities, and will be holding further consultations with a view to obtaining improved access to that market for aged Canadian Cheddar cheese.



LETTER CARRIER SERVICE, SELKIRK, MAN.

Mr. Slefanson: 1.	When was a survey last made in the town of Selkirk by the Post Office Department with a view to implementing letter carrier service?
2.	What was the result of that survey?
3.	What is the minimum number of calls required before letter carrier service is installed?
4.	Will there be a survey made in the town of Selkirk this year?
5.	If the survey is favourable, how soon will letter carrier service be implemented?


Azellus Denis: 1. March, 1962.
2.	It revealed 2,300 available calls.
3.	2,500.
4.	Yes.
5.	When treasury board authority to proceed has been obtained and 80 per cent of the householders have installed letter slots or boxes, house numbers and suitable pathways from the street.



GAME FISH STOCKING, MCADAM AREA, N.B.

Mr. MacRae: Has a survey been completed by the Department of Fisheries in the McAdam area of New Brunswick with a view to stocking the lakes and streams of that area with game fish?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: No.



PUBLICATION OF 1961 CENSUS MATERIAL, PORT ARTHUR  FORT WILLIAM

Mr. Fisher: Is it the intention of the census division of the d.b.s. to publish material from the 1961 census dealing with the lakehead cities of Port Arthur and Fort William as it is doing for such cities as Sudbury and Windsor, and, if not, for what reason?


Jean-Luc Pepin: All statistics of the 1961 census which are published for cities of 30,000 and over include the same data for Port Arthur and Fort William as for such cities as Sudbury and Windsor. However, there is one set of data which is compiled and published for cities when they reach 50,000 population that would not be available for Fort William and Port Arthur from the 1961 census. This refers to the basic population and housing data which are being published for 23 of Canada's largest cities on the basis of census tracts. These census tracts are statistical areas delineated within cities of 50,000 and over, and the tracts average usually from 4,000 to
8,000	population in size. When a city reaches

the foregoing level, the appropriate municipal authorities are asked if they would be interested in census data on a tract basis, if they have not already requested it. They are then asked to delineate the tract boundaries for use by census authorities in compiling these data in following censuses.



INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LOANS, PORT ARTHUR

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 484*-Mr. Fisher:
1.	Since its establishment, by year, what loans has the industrial development bank branch in Port Arthur made, in terms of kind (i.e. woods industry, motels, retail outlets, etc.), value, and percentage share of total outlay (aside from interest)?
2.	What is the total loan debt, including interest, outstanding as of now?
3.	What number and kind of loans, if any, have been repaid?
4.	What has been the operational cost per year of the branch in Port Arthur?
Mr. Benson:: 1, 2, 3 and 4. The information requested is not available. Loan approvals are classified by provinces on pages 16 and 17 of the last annual report of the industrial development bank and by types of businesses on pages 18 and 19 of that report.



TRANSACTION BETWEEN TRANSAIR LTD. AND T.C.A.

Mr. Fisher: 1.	In the transactions between Transair Limited and T.C.A. in 1963 regarding acquisition of planes, did T.C.A. have a book value for these planes or was their depreciation complete?
2.	Did T.C.A. enter into this transaction on the recommendation of the Minister of Transport, or was it a straight negotiation between the two carriers?


Jean-Charles Cantin: 1. Yes.
2. It was a straight negotiation between the two carriers.



POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION, ST. LAURENT, MAN.

Mr. Stefanson: Is it the intention of the government to build a post office at St. Laurent, Manitoba, this year?


Azellus Denis: No.



WINTER WORKS EXPENDITURES, B.C. COMMUNITIES

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 48 7-Mr. Howard:
For the fiscal year 1962-63, how much money, if any, was spent under the so-called winter works program for each of the communities of Atlin, Lower Post, Telegraph Creek, Stewart, Alice Arm, Kincolith, Greenville, Canyon city and Aiyansh, and for what projects in the case of each such community?
Mr. Byrne:: Nil. No submissions were received from these communities.
Questions



CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENTS RESPECTING CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Mr. Mather: Has the government received requests from the humane societies of Canada to make prosecutions of persons suspected of cruelty or neglect of animals more readily undertaken in respect to sections 385 to 390 of the criminal code, and, if so, is consideration being given to amending the pertinent sections?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: The answer to both parts of the question is yes.



* CANADIAN DELEGATION TO FISHERIES MEETING

Mr. Howard: What is the name and address of each of the persons on the Canadian delegation who travelled to Washington, D.C., to attend the recently convened meeting relating to the international convention for the high seas fisheries of the North Pacific ocean?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Mr. Speaker, as the reply to this question has already been given by me in the house in answer to questions directed to me, may I be allowed to table it herewith?
Dr. A. W. H. Needier, deputy minister of fisheries, Ottawa. S. V. Ozere, assistant deputy minister of fisheries, Ottawa. Dr. W. M. Sprules, special assistant to deputy minister of fisheries, Ottawa. R. T. Hager, 5560 Somerset Crescent, Vancouver, B.C. J. M. Buchanan, 2095 Beach Avenue, Vancouver, B.C. C. E. Giske, 225, 5th Ave., W., Prince Rupert, B.C. F. E. Koshe, 1370 Minto Drive, Vancouver, B.C. W. R. Hourston, area director, Department of Fisheries, Vancouver, B.C. K. S. Ketchen, fisheries research board, Nanaimo, B.C.



* NOTIFICATION OF DELEGATES TO FISHERIES MEETING

Mr. Howard: With respect to each of the persons, by name, on the Canadian delegation who travelled to Washington, D C., to attend the recently convened meeting relating to the international convention for the high seas fisheries of the North Pacific ocean, what was (a) his point of departure from Canada (b) his date of departure from Canada
(c)	his date of arrival in Washington (d) his (i) travelling and (ii) other expenses (e) the date upon, and the method by, which he was notified that he was to attend (f) the date and nature of any reply which was given to the notification referred to in part (e)?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: The reply to this question is lengthy, Mr. Speaker, and the same applies as with the previous question, No. 489. May I be permitted to table it herewith?


Mr. Speaker:: Has the minister leave?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The answer referred to above follows:]

(a)	(b)	(c)	(e)	(f)	Name	Point of departure from Canada	Date of departure from Canada	Date of arrival in Washington	Date upon and method by which he was notified that he was to attend	Date and nature of any reply which was given to notification referred to in Part (e)	Dr. A. W. H. Needier	.... Ottawa	June	5,	1963	June	5,	1963	May 24, 1963 - Orally	t	S. V. Ozere	.... Ottawa	June	5,	1963	June	5,	1963	May 24, 1963 - Orally	t	Dr. W. M. Sprules	June	5,	1963	June	5,	1963	May 24, 1963 - Orally	t	jR. T. Hager	June	9,	1963	June	9,	1963	May 28, 1963 - By telephone	May 28, 1963 -	Affirmative, for one week.J. M. Buchanan	.... Toronto	June	6,	1963	June	6,	1963	May 28, 1963 - By telephone	May 28, 1963 -	Affirmative.C. E. Giske	June	5,	1963	June	5,	1963	May 27, 1963 - By telephone	May 28, 1963 -	Affirmative.F. E. Koshe	.... * *New Westminster	Mar. 28,	1963	June 11,	1963	June 6, 1963 - By telephone	June 6, 1963 -	Affirmative.W. R. Hourston	.... Toronto	June	5,	1963	June	5,	1963	May 24, 1963 - By telephone	t	K. S. Ketchen	
Toronto	June	5,	1963	June	5,	1963	May 24, 1963 - By telephone	t	(d)	Travelling and other expenses will not be known until members of delegation have returned to Canada, f Civil servants were instructed to attend.
* Mr. Koshe left for halibut fishing on March 28, 1963. He landed his first trip in Alaska and did not return to Canada. He was contacted in Alaska on June 6, and flew from there to Washington via Seattle.
1332	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Questions



SOVIET OR CUBAN DIPLOMATS DECLARED PERSONA NON GRATA

Mr. Balcer: Since 1955, have any members of embassies of Soviet bloc countries or Cuba been declared persona non grata by the Canadian government as a result of improper acts affecting the security of Canada, and have been requested to leave Canada; and, if so, how many, and in what years?


Mr. Stewart:: Yes. It is a matter of public knowledge that three individuals were declared persona non grata and left Canada as a result of official requests that they be recalled. These were Mr. G. F. Popov of the Soviet embassy in 1956, Mr. Stanislas Michno of the Polish embassy in 1958, and Lieut. Colonel A. F. Loginov of the Soviet embassy in 1961. There have been other cases involving personnel of the embassies of Soviet bloc countries in which the recall of personnel was requested but to which no publicity was given. In these matters it is not always in the public interest to provide information, and I am conscious that my predecessor faced these same difficulties when he decided on April 26, 1961, in response to a similar question, to decline to provide details about such cases.



GOVERNMENT BONDS REDEEMED

Mr. Pigeon: 1.	Among the government of Canada bonds issued from 1914 to the present time (a) how many were redeemed (giving serial numbers) (b) in what years (c) in what amounts?
2.	How many of the bonds mentioned in question No. 1 were bearer bonds (giving serial numbers)?
3.	How many were registered bonds (giving serial numbers)?
4.	Of the bonds mentioned in questions numbered 2 and 3 (a) what was the total amount of the bearer bonds (b) what was the total amount of the registered bonds?


Edgar John Benson: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has agreed to withdraw this question.
Question withdrawn.



NICKEL ORE CONCENTRATE PRODUCTION

Mr. Pigeon: What was, by provinces, the total tonnage of nickel ore concentrates produced last year in Canada?


Jean-Luc Pepin: Data, by provinces are not available in compliance with section 15 of the Statistics Act.



NICKEL ORE CONCENTRATE EXPORTS

Mr. Pigeon: 1.	What was the total tonnage of nickel ore concentrates exported last year to the United States?
2.	How much foreign exchange has that exported ore brought into Canada?
Questions


Jean-Luc Pepin: 1 and 2. There are no separate figures on exports of nickel ore concentrates. Exports of nickel in ores, concentrates, matte or speiss (class 255-20) to the United States in 1962 totalled 479 tons valued at $677,388.



IRON ORE PRODUCTION

Mr. Pigeon: What was, by provinces, the total tonnage of iron ore produced last year in Canada?


Jean-Luc Pepin: Producers shipments of iron ore 1962:
Newfoundland
Quebec
Ontario
British Columbia
Tons
7.712.000 11,460,000
6.518.000
1.750.000
Canada
27,440,000



IRON ORE CONCENTRATE EXPORTS

Mr. Pigeon: 1.	What was the total tonnage of iron ore concentrates exported to the United States last year?
2.	How much foreign exchange has that exported ore brought to Canada?


Jean-Luc Pepin: 1 and 2. Exports of iron ore concentrates (including agglomerated iron ore) (export classes 251-08 and 251-12) to the United States in 1962 totalled 8,109,106 tons valued at $85,374,225.



COPPER ORE CONCENTRATE PRODUCTION

Mr. Pigeon: What was, by provinces, the total tonnage of copper ore concentrates produced last year in Canada?


Jean-Luc Pepin: Data, by provinces, are not available in compliance with section 15 of the Statistics Act.



IRON COPPER CONCENTRATE EXPORTS

Mr. Pigeon: 1.	What was the total tonnage of iron copper concentrates exported to the United States last year?
2.	How much foreign exchange has that exported ore brought into Canada?


Jean-Luc Pepin: 1. and 2. There are no statistics of exports of "iron copper concentrates" from Canada.



UNEMLOYMENT INSURANCE FOR TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES, QUEBEC ROADS DEPARTMENT

Mr. Mariineau: Has the federal government received from the government of the province of Quebec a request to include temporary employees of the roads department of the province of Quebec in the provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: Yes.

Questions



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES

Mr. Perron: How many employees are there in the Post Office Department and, of these (a) how many are bilingual (b) how many speak English only (c) how many speak French only (d) how many are French Canadians?


Mr. Pickersgill:: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether questions 506 to 566 inclusive could stand?


Mr. Gregoire:: Mr. Speaker, I think this question was asked of the Postmaster General, and I cannot see why the Secretary of State should answer.
(Translation):


Azellus Denis: I would point out to my hon. friend that some of those questions concern the Secretary of State and others the Postmaster General. That is why the Secretary of State has answered.
(Text):


Mr. Speaker:: Questions 506 to 566 inclusive stand.
Question stands.



COMMEMORATIVE STAMP FOR COLONEL MCCRAE

Mr. Hales: Is the government giving consideration to issuing a commemorative stamp in memory of the late Col. John McCrae of Guelph, Ontario, the author of the immortal poem, "In Flanders Fields"?


Azellus Denis: Not at present.



UNEMPLOYED BETWEEN AGES OF 45 AND 60

Mr. Mariineau: 1.	How many persons between the ages of 45 and 60 years of age are at present unemployed in Canada?
2.	How many of such persons have been unemployed at least six months during the last nine months?
3.	How many of such persons are in receipt of unemployment insurance benefits?
4.	How many of such persons are in receipt of pensions?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1. The number of unemployed persons 45 years of age and over is estimated at 91,000; the number between 45 and 60 is not available.
2. It is estimated that approximately one quarter of those unemployed 45 years of age and over are unemployed at this time of the year for more than six months.
3	and 4. This information is not available.



FISHERIES RESEARCH LABORATORY, LONDON, ONT.

Mr. Thomas: Is a new fisheries research laboratory building to be constructed in the London area to replace the building now in use there and, if so, what progress has been made in connection with this project?
[Mr. Byrne.l


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Present plans do not
provide for construction of a fisheries research laboratory in the London area.
(Translation):



CLERKS AND POSTMEN, HULL, QUE.

Mr. Leduc: How many (a) clerks grade 2 (b) postmen were hired in the Hull post office from November 24, 1960, to November 24, 1962?


Azellus Denis: (a) 1 postal clerk 2. (b) 3 letter carriers (postmen).
(Text):



DAILY PRINTINGS OF HOUSE OF COMMONS &quot;HANSARD&quot;

Mr. Knowles: 1.	How many copies of the daily edition of the House of Commons Hansard are printed each day on the average (a) the English edition (b) the French edition?
2.	What steps are taken to promote the widest possible distribution thereof?


Yvon Dupuis: In so far as the department of public printing and stationery is concerned-
1.	(a) 11,574; (b) 3,117.
2.	Over 60,000 copies of a printed circular are distributed across Canada before each session of parliament, to promote the House of Commons Hansard. The debates are on sale every day in the queen's printer's bookstores in Ottawa, Toronto and Montreal.



PENSION BY-LAWS, BANK OF CANADA

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 581
Mr. Fisher:: 1.	Has the Bank of Canada a set of pension bylaws and, if so, was a section or rule of those by-laws suspended by the board of the bank and for what reason?
2.	Is the suspension still in effect and, if so, what effect does it have upon the pension received by, or entitled to by, any former senior employees of the bank?
3.	Has the government, as distinct from the Bank of Canada, received any communications from Mr. James Coyne, a former governor, regarding any pension entitlement he may have?


Edgar John Benson: 1 and 2. The Bank of Canada pension fund is a separate and distinct fund made up of past contributions by the staff and the bank, plus accrued earnings thereon. Information relating to the fund is not a matter of public record.
3. No.



CIVILIAN USE OF NAMAO R.C.A.F. STATION, EDMONTON

Mr. Lambert: Is any consideration being given to the development of the facilities at R.C.A.F. station Namao for civilian air terminal purposes, either ancillary to or as an alternative to the Edmonton international airport or the municipal airport of the city of Edmonton?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: No.

(Translation):



MAIL CONTRACT, STE. SCHOLASTIQUE, QUE.

Mr. Pigeon: Does Mr. Leo Paul Robert, Ste. Scholastique (county of Deux Montagnes) have a mail contract; if so, (a) since when (b) does the government intend to allow him to operate under this contract until the expiration of the four year period?


Azellus Denis: Yes-Ste. Scholastique R.R. No. 2. (a) 1st October 1959. (b) No. Tenders are presently being called for a new contract to become effective on October 1, 1963.
(Text):



RESTOCKING OF FISHING STREAMS, LUNENBURG COUNTY, N.S.

Mr. Crouse: Has the Minister of Fisheries carried out any surveys in Nova Scotia with a view to improving sport fishing and, if so, will he give consideration to restocking the lakes and streams of the Gold river area of Lunenburg county with trout and salmon?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Continuous surveys are carried out throughout Nova Scotia with the object of improving fishing. So far as Gold river is concerned plans have been laid for a preliminary survey this year to determine the course for most effective action.



SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER

Mr. Fisher: 1.	Has the Secretary of State for External Affairs taken an executive assistant or a special assistant on staff and, if so, what is this person's name, age, place of birth, institutions of education and educational qualifications, governmental or business experience (position held, length of experience, name of firm) and initial and present salary with the government?
2.	What length of time has this assistant undertaken to serve the secretary of state and/or what engagement in length of time was given to the assistant by the secretary of state?
3.	In brief, what particular qualities of this assistant led the secretary of state to engage him?


John B. Stewart: 1. Yes, a special assistant; Name; Mr. James Duncan Edmonds. Age: 27 yrs. Place of birth: Toronto, Ont.
Institutions of education:	University of
Toronto, B.A. (honors); London school of economics, postgraduate.
Experience: Office of the leader of the opposition 1960-61; Lecturer, political science, Carleton Univ. 1961-1963.
Initial and present salary:	$10,000 per
annum.
2.	No length of time specified.
3.	His experience and knowledge of international affairs.
Orders for Returns



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. McMillan: 1.	During the last five years, how many persons in Canada have died each year from (a) heart disease (b) cancer?
2.	What federal grants are provided annually for research into the causes and treatment of these diseases?
3.	On what basis, and in what manner, have these grants been distributed?
4.	What Canadian institutions have received these grants?


Yvon Dupuis: Return tabled.



ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL


Mr. McIntosh: 1.	As of May 1944 and May 1963, what was the total officer personnel, excluding militia and reserves, of the (a) navy (b) army (c) air force?
2.	As of May 1944 and May 1963, what was the total number of officers of the ranks listed hereunder: (a) navy (i) captain (ii) commodore (iii) rear admiral (b) army (i) colonel (ii) brigadier (iii) major general (c) air force (i) group captain (ii) air commodore (iii) air vice marshal?
3.	How many R.C.A.F. officers, and on what rank, are receiving flying pay while performing full time duties which do not necessarily involve flying?
4.	What number of R.C.A.F. officers, and of what rank, receive flying pay while performing full time duties which do not involve flying for (a) jet aircraft (b) conventional aircraft?
5.	What is the total annual cost of flying pay to R.C.A.F. officers while performing full time duties which do not necessarily involve flying?
6.	What is the total estimated cost of supplying aircraft and maintaining aircraft for the purpose of the program to give flying time to R.C.A.F. officers engaged in other full time duties?
7.	How many R.C.A.F. personnel are engaged as instructors and servicing aircraft for the program to give flying time to R.C.A.F. officers whose full time duties do not necessarily involve flying, and what is the total annual pay of these servicing and instructional personnel?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: Return tabled.



GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT, INVESTMENTS, ETC.

Mr. Perron: 1.	During the years 1950 to 1962 inclusive, what was the value of the gross national product (a) in current dollars (b) in constant dollars (1949 = 100)?
2.	During	each	of	these	years,	what	was	the
average annual earnings of wage earners (a) in current aollars (b) in constant dollars (1949 = 100) ?
3.	During	each	of	these	years,	what	was	the
average annual income of Canadian farmers (a) in current dollars (b) in constant dollars (1949 = 100)?
4.	During	each	of	these	years,	what	was	the
average annual income of farmers in the province of Quebec (a) in current dollars (b) in constant dollars (1949 = 100) ?
5.	During	each	of	these	years,	what	amounts
were invested (a) in the public sector (b) in the private sector?
6.	During each of these years, what were the foreign investments in Canada?
7.	During each of these years, what were the amounts of Canadian investments abroad?

Motions for Papers
8.	What amounts were paid out annually for each of these years to foreign companies or individuals in (a) interest (b) dividends (c) profits (d) capital repayments?


Jean-Luc Pepin: Return tabled.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 5-Mr. Knowles:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of any directives or memoranda on the subject of representations to the Minister of Labour regarding employment issued by the unemployment insurance commission or any official thereof, dated at any time since November 1, 1962.
He said: Mr. Speaker, the minister and I have had our word about this motion. I am prepared to withdraw it and to substitute a question in its place.
Mr. Speaker:: Dropped.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



REPORTS BY JOSEPH DREAVER

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 7-Mr. Howard:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all reports of Mr. Joseph Dreaver who was employed to survey the Indians of Saskatchewan in respect of their reactions and recommendations concerning the findings of the joint committee of the Senate and House of Commons on Indian affairs.
Guy Favreau: Tabled herewith.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 12-Mr. Pigeon:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence and reports on the site of the 1967 world's fair exchanged between the government and the following other governments or bodies concerned: (a) international joint commission (b) St. Lawrence seaway authority (United States and Canada) (c) St. Lawrence river pilots' association (d) national harbours board (e) Canadian National Railways (f) Quebec hydro (g) city of Verdun
(h)	Canadian association for the protection of birds
(i)	Department of Transport (j) town of St. Lambert (k) government of the province of Quebec (1) Canadian world exhibition corporation.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I believe the hon. gentleman has graciously agreed to let this motion stand.


Mr. Pigeon:: I agree.
Motion stands.



ST. PIE DE BAGOT, QUE.    CONSTRUCTION OF PENAL INSTITUTION

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 14-Mr. Ricard:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence,

telegrams and other documents exchanged between the government or any of its agencies or departments and any provincial or municipal government, individuals or organizations since January 1, 1958, in respect of the construction of a penal institution in the parish of St. Pie de Bagot.
John Whitney Pickersgill: In the absence of the Minister of Justice I wonder if the hon. gentleman would be good enough to let this motion stand.


Mr. Ricard:: Yes.
Motion stands.



DIRECTOR OF COMPANIES BRANCH

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 16-Mr. Fisher:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence relating to the post of director of the companies branch, from July, 1959 to May 17, 1963, exchanged between the civil service commission, ministers of the crown, any applicants for the post, and any other person or persons, including those who hold provincial offices.
John Whitney Pickersgill: I understand that the hon. member for Port Arthur has had some discussion with one of the civil service commissioners about this motion and that there was some understanding between them. I wonder if the motion could stand today?


Mr. Speaker:: Stand.
Motion stands.



CORRESPONDENCE RESPECTING MUNICIPAL LOAN BOARD

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 19-Mr. Graffiey:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the gov-thereof and any of the provincial governments or agents thereof since April 30, 1963, concerning the establishment of a municipal development and loan board.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, there appears to be a regrettable misprint with regard to the hon. member's motion and, as far as I can gather after a great deal of deciphering, motion No. 21. In the circumstances I wonder if the hon. members would both agree to have the motions reprinted so the house can see what they really are?


An hon. Member:: And rewritten, too.


Georges-J. Valade: I think the Secretary of State is referring to motion No. 21 which is in my name. I think it is clear enough-


Mr. Speaker:: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but we are dealing with motion No. 19.


Georges-J. Valade: I understood the Secretary of State to mention motion No. 21.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if I might make the request that both motion No. 19 and motion No. 21 should stand. In view of the misprinting of them, hon. members on this side of the chamber have not had a real opportunity to consider what the motions are.


Mr. Graffley:: Will the minister please indicate, in order to facilitate my thinking on this matter, what he considers to be the misprint?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps I could read line 3:
-and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the gov-thereof and any of the provincial governments-
After a great deal of working on it I came to the conclusion that the last line of the motion of the hon. member for Brome-Mis-sisquoi was put after motion No. 21 and that two or three lines which belong to the motion of the other hon. gentleman were put after this one. However, it is so mixed up that I think new ministers should not be blamed for not being able to understand them. I am sure everyone will agree that we ought to have them reprinted.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, I wish the
Secretary of State would take these motions one after the other as they appear on the order paper so that we can discuss the merit of the argument about the matter of mix-up.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I shall be very happy to do that. I believe the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi is good enough to comply with my request.


William Heward Grafftey: Yes.
Motion stands.
(Translation):


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Speaker, with the leave of the house, I should like to point out to the Secretary of State that on reading the French version of my motion in the order paper, I note that it is printed correctly in one of the official languages of our country, the French language. For that reason, could the Secretary of State or his parliamentary secretary tell the house that he is willing to accept my motion?
(Text):


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for St. Mary made the same discovery about 10 minutes ago that the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi has now made, but I think in view of the fact that debate on the budget is to start today and we are holding up the financial critic of the opposition, and in view of the additional circumstance I mentioned to the hon. gentleman
Motions for Papers
that the minister had not had a chance to consider it, I hope the hon. member would not seek to withdraw the acquiescence he gave.
(Translation):


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Speaker, I want to emphasize the fact that the minister has a French speaking parliamentary secretary at his service. It seems to me that I have introduced my notice of motion in a completely correct manner in one of the two official languages of this country, and all I am asking the Secretary of State is whether or not he is ready to accept my notice of motion.
(Text):


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not think that the motion relates to my ministerial responsibilities at all.


Mr. Speaker:: I may say at this stage that there is no debate on this type of motion, and the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi did agree to have the motion stood.


William Heward Grafftey: On a question of privilege affecting all hon. members of the house-and I think this is a very serious point-I admit that in the English language in orders of the day there was a mistake in my notice of motion, but I also brought to the attention of the minister that in the French language my notice of motion was correct. I think his party, who said they were going to save confederation and sweep the province of Quebec, should indicate their good will by accepting immediately my notice of motion.


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member will permit me, did not the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi raise a question of privilege?


William Heward Grafftey: Yes, Mr. Speaker, a point of privilege.


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member will refer to citation 104(5) of Beauchesne he will see the matter must be raised at the earliest opportunity, and of course that is so here.


William Heward Grafftey: Well, Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps the hon. member will allow me to finish. I think it is important for the general good order of proceedings in the house that the record be kept straight, and I do not see any basic urgency about this motion, particularly after the hon. member has agreed to allow it to stand. It is important that both languages correspond as fully as possible with regard to this type of motion. Therefore I suggest that the interesting discussion we have had and are having should be delayed a few days until the matter has been cleared up.


William Heward Grafftey: Could I just mention one thing, Mr. Speaker. In Votes and Proceedings

Motions jor Papers
for the last number of days my intention to move this motion was correctly printed in both languages. I examined Orders of the Day today as soon as possible when I came into the house, and unless this is a subterfuge on the part of the government of the day trying to delay this question, they should deal with it in a spirit of good will immediately.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I thought I was dealing with it in a spirit of good will, and if the hon. gentleman had done what the hon. member for St. Mary did-to discover that the French version was correct at once and not 10 or 15 minutes later-it seems to me he might have had a point like the hon. member for St. Mary, who graciously accepted the request from the government that since it had been misprinted we should wait until it was correctly printed in both languages.
I suggest if bilingualism is to mean anything it must be bilingualism, and that the order paper should be correct in both languages and comprehensible to all hon. members at the time the motion is put. It seems to me, sir, you have quite properly ruled that this matter cannot be reopened at this stage.
Mr. Graff fey: I would like to bring it to the minister's attention that the Orders of the Day I had in front of me when I came into the house was in the English language, and I brought this question before the house at the earliest possible time in all good conscience.
I would also like to point out to the government side that they were fully seized of the import of my question in both the official languages for the last number of days because it was included in Votes and Proceedings. I am just bringing an important principle before them. When a question in Votes and Proceedings or Orders of the Day is brought before the house in either one of the official languages, then the house is seized of the question. For that reason I would like a spirit of good will to be shown, and I would like the Secretary of State to indicate today whether my notice of motion is going to be accepted or not.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I suggest that if the rules of the house are properly complied with we make the best possible progress in the house, and that is the best way to have a spirit of good will.


Hon. Leon Balcer (Three Rivers):: I think it is absolutly wrong to suggest that anything written in French on the order paper should have to be delayed a week. I think it should be the same for both languages, and I think the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi has a proper right to have this correct in both languages.


Mr. Speaker:: May I point out to all hon. members that a decision of the house was taken, and now 15 minutes later this matter has arisen. The matter of course is very important, but when the house has taken a decision I would like all hon. members to get on with the further business before the house. If, on the other hand, hon. members feel so keenly about the matter and the house is prepared to give unanimous consent, then the Chair has no objection.


Georges-J. Valade: On the question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, the Secretary of State said motions 19 and 21 were badly drafted. When the Secretary of State said that I think he found an excuse not to comply with the requests of hon. members of parliament on this side of the house. It was not Your Honour who said that. It was said by the Secretary of State, and I think a decision should be given by the Chair with regard to what the Secretary of State said.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I did not say they were badly drafted at all.


Georges-J. Valade: You did.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The record will show that I said what is a fact, that they were badly printed, and I made no criticism whatsoever of the drafting. When my statement was challenged by the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi I read part of it to show it was badly printed. I explained it was badly printed. I therefore made no criticism whatsoever of the drafting, but I confess I did not read the motions a couple of days ago when they first appeared on Votes and Proceedings. Perhaps that is a sin, but when I looked at the order paper this morning it took me five or ten minutes to decipher what I think is the correct explanation of it. But all ministers are busy doing other things than finding misprints in the order paper, and it seems to me we are making a mountain out of a molehill over this whole business. So far as I am concerned I think if the hon. member is so anxious to get this correspondence about lotteries, then possibly the government would not have any objection to having the motion passed so we can proceed with the business of the country.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. It seems to me we have spent far too much time on this point of procedure. The whole question concerns a misprint. The hon. member has agreed to allow his motion to stand, and unless we have the unanimous consent of the house to go back on that agreement, I suggest we proceed with the business before the house.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Speaker, you have just ruled on my question of privilege-


Mr. Speaker:: Order.' I am sorry, but the hon. member has had a generous allowance of time.


William Heward Grafftey: -but there was unanimous consent to accepting my motion.


Mr. Speaker:: Does the house give unanimous consent to reverting to this motion?


Some hon. Members:: Yes.


Some hon. Members:: No.



DEFENCE PRODUCTION


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 20-Mr. Orlikow:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence between Mr. Stewart Geddes and the Minister of Defence Production and any other officials in his department.
He said: I have talked to the minister and I am prepared to withdraw this motion.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 21-Mr. Valade:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government or any agency-ernment of the province of Quebec relating to lotteries.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Is the hon. gentleman willing to comply with my request?


Georges-J. Valade: I will accept the suggestion, but I do not see that there is any trouble in reading this motion.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Then may I read the last two lines of the motion:
-and other documents exchanged between the federal government or any agency-ernment of the province of Quebec relating to lotteries.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, in reply to the minister and because of the bicultural interest he has shown, may I ask him to read the French version of the motion? There is no misunderstanding the French translation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am only too happy, Mr. Speaker, to pay tribute to the superiority of the French version.


Georges-J. Valade: Then perhaps the minister could give a superior answer to the one he has given.
Motion stands.



WORLD FAIR


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 22-Mr. Valade:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid
Motions for Papers
before this house a copy of all telegrams, letters and other correspondence exchanged between the mayor of Montreal and the federal government since April 8, 1963, relating to the Montreal world fair.
Jean-Paul Deschatelets: I was ready to answer this motion, Mr. Speaker.
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, this motion can be entertained on the understanding that personal and confidential documents will be considered as privileged.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, I am willing to accept the minister's reservation, but in view of the fact that this matter is extremely important to establish if the exhibition will be held or not, I wonder what reservation the minister has in mind. In my opinion, we should have more information on that matter.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: It is the customary
reservation, Mr. Speaker. If there are confidential documents, it goes without saying that we cannot produce them, but we will produce all the others.
(Text):


Georges-J. Valade: There was no reservation indicated by the minister in connection with this motion.


John Whitney Pickersgill: This is No. 22.


Georges-J. Valade: I am sorry; I thought we were on 23.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
(Translation):

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 23-Mr. Valade:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of the correspondence exchanged between the federal government, the government of the province of Quebec and the city of Montreal, relating to the new lay-out of the trans-Canada highway on the island of Montreal.
Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Speaker, with the reservation made for the previous motion, this motion is acceptable provided the personal and confidential documents be considered as privileged and also that agreement be obtained from the provincial government.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion subject to the reservation made by the minister?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Motions for Papers
(Text):

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 24-Mr. Marlineau:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the government, or any agencies or departments thereof, and any provincial government, since April 21, 1963, relating to joint plans.
John Whitney Pickersgill: I am asking the hon. gentleman if he would mind allowing this motion to stand today. I should like to discuss the wording with him because we are not quite sure what he means by joint plans.


Mr. Mariineau:: I am always very pleased to have a discussion with the minister.
Motion stands.



OUTSIDE ASSISTANTS IN BUDGET PREPARATION

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 25-Mr. Aiken:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all letters and correspondence that, since April 8, 1963, passed between the Minister of Finance and any companies, partnerships or persons respecting the securing of the services of each of the three persons named by him in his statement to this house on June 14 as having had knowledge of the contents of the budget speech before delivery.
Walter Lockhart Gordon: I would be quite willing to agree to this motion, but there is no such correspondence.


Mr. Aiken:: In the circumstances I will withdraw the motion.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



WHEAT AGREEMENT WITH CHINA

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 26-Mr. Fisher:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of the long term agreement signed by the Canadian wheat board and the China resources company covering the period June 1, 1961 to December 19, 1963.
John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if the hon. member for Port Arthur would agree, in the absence of the Minister of Trade and Commerce, to allowing this motion and the next one to stand? The minister has not had a chance to consider them.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I regretfully agree, in view of the fact these motions are so familiar to the government.
Motion stands.



WHEAT CONTRACTS WITH CHINA

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 27-Mr. Fisher:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all contracts entered into between the Canadian wheat board and the China resources company for the sale of grain under the long term agreement between the Canadian wheat board and the China resources company.
Mr. Speaker:: I understand this motion also stands.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Motion stands.



EXPENSES OF CANDIDATES, 1963 ELECTION

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 28-Mr. Knowles:
That an order of the house do issue for a return showing the total amount of election expenses on behalf of each candidate in the general election of April 8, 1963, by constituencies, as indicated in the return respecting election expenses submitted by the official agent of each candidate, as required under the provisions of section 63 of The Canada Elections Act; and showing also the names of any candidates, by constituencies, on whose behalf election expense returns have not been submitted.
John Whitney Pickersgill: In this case, I wonder if I might be permitted to raise a question about this motion. I understand that the final date for some of these returns has not yet arrived, and that strict compliance with the motion might involve indicating that some candidates had not made returns which they were not yet legally required to make. I am quite sure we all understand what the hon. gentleman wants from this motion, and if it were clearly understood that it could be complied with as though it had been passed after the date when each of these returns should legally be made, then it seems to me no such misunderstanding could arise.


Mr. Knowles:: I think the minister's reservation is satisfactory. We all understand that, for most of us, the date is past, but for those very distant areas there might be a week or so to go.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion subject to the reservation previously expressed by the minister?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 29-Mr. Horner (Acadia):
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before the house a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, projected plans and documents between the federal government or any agency or branch thereof and any provincial government, persons or organizations since January 1. 1961, with regard to rail line abandonment.
Mr. Mcllraiih:: Mr. Speaker, I have spoken to the mover of the motion and I understand he is not requesting correspondence concerning every individual case of abandonment, but rather that there should be produced the correspondence relating to the implementation of the recommendations of the MacPher-son commission on the subject of branch

lines. Subject to this reservation and to obtaining the consent of the provincial governments regarding correspondence with the provincial governments, there is no objection to the motion.


Mr. Speaker:: Is there any objection to the reservations as stated by the minister?


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion subject to the reservations stated by the minister?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a couple of questions to the Minister of Finance. I am sure they will be received in that good spirit which is apparent here today. Did the minister advise Mr. Kierans last night that resolution No. 11 of the budget was going to be withdrawn; and did he so advise anyone else today?
I ask him these questions because the stock market reacted so quickly this afternoon. Was it as a result of his having given second thought to this important matter and not being entirely dependant on the three budget tinkers?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: Mr. Speaker, I gave no information to Mr. Kierans, and I did not make any statement to anybody else until I came into this house, other than the Prime Minister and certain members of the cabinet.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. In view of this announcement does the minister consider it advisable to delay the budget debate while he revises his budget or brings in a new one?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Bow River):: further supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Are any other items of the tax proposals in the budget under consideration for being withdrawn by the government?


Gordon Harvey Aiken: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Minister of Finance in view of his announcement on motions. Will he also consider withdrawal of the tax on building materials, with regard to which there has been much criticism?
Inquiries of the Ministry Mr. Gordon: Mr. Speaker, in view of the condition of the country's finances I am not considering that suggestion.


Mr. Thomas M. Bell (Saint John-Albert):: have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will the Minister of Finance give the same consideration to representatives of small business as he did to Mr. Kierans and others?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: Mr. Speaker, the short answer to that is, certainly-


An hon. Member:: Then give it.


Walter Lockhart Gordon: -but I would like, in addition, to say that the change or the deferment that I announced on motions today would be made in this particular tax was done despite Mr. Kierans.


John George Diefenbaker: Despite him?


Mr. Smith:: To spite him?



REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION INTO STOCK MARKET TRANSACTIONS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Prime Minister a question that arises from a previous question concerning the use of outside contractors, being paid by their companies, in the preparation of the budget. My question arises from an examination I have made of the accelerated selling pattern in stocks, particularly in certain oils, in the weeks immediately before the budget. Would the Prime Minister consider having the officials of the Montreal and Toronto stock exchanges investigate the share trading pattern in terms of what companies, agents and brokers handled it, in order that we can be sure there has been nothing more than intelligent anticipation?


Righi Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I will be glad to submit the hon. gentleman's request to the officers of those stock exchanges, over which the government has no control.


Mr. Baldwin:: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I have a supplementary question also, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Peace River.


Gerald William Baldwin: In view of the statement made earlier by the Minister of Finance that the government will continue with the practice of obtaining the assistance of outside government sources, will the Prime Minister give consideration to introducing legislation to provide an oath of secrecy which

Inquiries of the Ministry will be legal and binding, as distinct from the methods used in the preparation of the budget?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, the oath of secrecy given in the case to which my hon. friend refers was legal and binding.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, while the government may have no control over the stock exchanges, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he himself is prepared to have a study made of the trading pattern? Will he make such inquiries as are necessary, to see that there have not been any leaks with reference to the budget, because of the prior drop in oil and pipe line stocks?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, in so far as this is a matter of governmental and ministerial responsibility I will be very glad indeed to make inquiries.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, in that connection-


Mr. Speaker:: The right hon. prime minister.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John George Diefenbaker: -could I repeat the suggestion I made to the Prime Minister yesterday, when I asked him whether he would consider having this whole question referred, either to a special committee of the house or a standing committee. In this way it would be possible to call these people and have them brought before the committee and ascertain something of the dealings that took place during the period of some days prior to the budget being brought down. There would then be no intrusion of governmental responsibility, but we would have an opportunity of calling these various people before the committee in a completely non-partisan way-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: -and would be able to secure the most objective information. It would reveal that nothing happened, or it might reveal something else.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, if the right hon. gentleman has any evidence on which to base the suspicion he has indicated, he can produce it in the budget debate. Then the government will be able to consider whether the procedure which he recommends would be useful in the circumstances.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John George Diefenbaker: At least the Prime Minister has the support of the Secretary of State; one can see that. I simply ask, will the


Prime Minister give parliament an opportunity to get the facts regarding these tinkers who were brought in in connection with the budget?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Once again, Mr. Speaker, I would ask the right hon. gentleman to put his questions properly. When he refers to gentlemen outside this house as tinkers, that is not the proper way to put a question, and I would-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


An hon. Member:: Who is the Speaker?


Lester Bowles Pearson: -also like to tell the right hon. gentleman that I do not believe in guilt by innuendo or insinuation.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I am sure hon. members will appreciate the fact that the proceedings are now taking on the nature of a debate rather than questions across the floor. I wonder whether we could proceed with urgent business.


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


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: There was no insinuation; there was no innuendo: there was a
request for information, and the Prime Minister is trying to hide behind a smokescreen.



REPORTED HEAVY BUYING OF BUILDING MATERIALS BEFORE BUDGET PRESENTATION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lawrence E. Kindt (Macleod):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Trade and Commerce, but in his absence perhaps I could ask it of his parliamentary secretary. Would the minister be good enough to tell the house whether it is true that fabulous orders for building materials were placed immediately prior to the budget. Will the minister investigate and give the house particulars?


Jean-Luc Pepin: I am sure that on behalf of the minister I can say he will investigate.



INCLUSION IN BUDGET OF PROVISION FOR DEBT FREE MONEY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. S. Smallwood (Battle River-Camrose):: Due to the fact that during the last session of parliament this government, when in opposition, supported a Social Credit amendment in favour of debt free money, and due to the fact that the Minister of Finance called in outside consultants-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Clifford Silas Smallwood: I rise on a question of privilege.


Mr. Speaker:: And, if I may say so, I am rising on a question of privilege, too. It is this. Would the hon. member kindly state his question in as succinct a form as possible; and the question should be an urgent one.


Clifford Silas Smallwood: I am just leading up to my question. Ever since this government came to office it has refused to answer questions, and now hon. members opposite refuse to listen.


John Whitney Pickersgill: On a point of order, the hon. member was quite properly asked by Your Honour to put his question, not to make a speech. It seems to me that if any progress is to be made in this house at all, and if we are to get on with the budget debate which hon. members seemed to think was so urgent two days ago, the rules of this house should be observed.


Mr. Churchill:: On a point of order, this lecturing of the house by the Secretary of State is becoming a disgraceful practice. He is lecturing, not speaking to the point of order.


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps we could have a little order and then my modest remarks might be listened to. Questions must be urgent in character. We have had considerable indulgence, liberty, leaning to the left and to the right. I would urge upon hon. members that we are here to do business. The length of the question period has increased during the past four weeks to an hour and periods which are sometimes longer than that. It used to be that the question period was reserved for urgent questions and took about half an hour. Hon. members must discipline themselves. The Chair can only attempt to apply the rules under standing orders. It is up to each hon. member to take upon himself the responsibility of making sure when he asks a question that it is urgent and that it has arisen within the last 24 or 48 hours. I appeal to hon. members to assist me to try to get a little order and cut down the time spent on questions. The questions asked must be necessary questions, topical questions, urgent questions. Again I appeal to hon. members to assist the Chair.


Clifford Silas Smallwood: I will try to assist the Chair by shortening my question. Since the Minister of Finance called in outside consultants, would he explain why he did not consult also with one or two of the Social
Inquiries of the Ministry Credit leaders in order that he might include debt free money in the budget instead of increasing taxes?
(Translation).



INQUIRY AS TO ISSUANCE OF BILINGUAL CHEQUES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerard Girouard (Labelle):: Mr. Speaker, since one of my constituents has just returned to me a cheque issued by the treasury board and drawn up in English only, could the Minister of Finance tell the house whether the publicity made by the former government about bilingual cheques has become a reality-and, if not, whether the present government intends to do something about it?
(Text):


Walter Lockhart Gordon: I thank the hon. gentleman for having given me notice of this question. I am informed that an announcement was made in the house in February 1962 by the then minister of finance that the treasury board had directed that, upon the depletion of existing stocks of cheque forms, and of those on order at that time, forms printed in both English and French would be adopted in the case of all cheques drawn on the account of the receiver general.
Over 90 per cent of the five million or so cheques issued each month by the federal treasury are in bilingual form at the present time, and the remainder will all have been converted to bilingual form before the end of the current fiscal year.



PROTESTS AGAINST APPLICATION OF SALES TAX TO BUILDING MATERIALS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. Russell MacEwan (Pictou):: May I
address a question to the Prime Minister, of which I have not given notice. Has he received a telegram from eight lumber companies in the county of Pictou, Nova Scotia, protesting the 11 per cent sales tax, expressing concern for the 268 employees involved and urging a reconsideration of this step? If so, would he give serious consideration to the representations of these firms which are so important to the economy of the area, in spite of what the Minister of Finance has already said this afternoon?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Overlooking the last part of the question, I cannot say whether I have received this particular telegram. If and when I do receive it, I shall certainly give it consideration.


Mr. William Dean Howe (Hamilton South):: I wish to address a question to the Minister of Finance. Will the minister comment on a telegram, a copy of which I sent to him,

Inquiries of the Ministry which protests the 11 per cent sales tax on building materials, sent by the metropolitan Hamilton house builders association? This association does 85 per cent of the building in the Hamilton area-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I understand the hon. member is stopping at the end of that first paragraph. Is that right?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: I thank the hon. member for having sent me notice of this question. I have received a number of letters and telegrams, including one from the president of the metropolitan Hamilton house builders association, referring to the withdrawal of the sales tax exemption for building materials. These are all receiving careful attention.
I would like again to refer to the statement in the budget speech that relief will be provided in cases where a manufacturer or contractor is prevented by a fixed price contract signed before June 14 from including the new tax in his selling price. Provision for this relief is made in paragraph 13 of the excise tax resolution, and details concerning its application will be available from the Department of National Revenue.


Léon Balcer: I should like to ask the Minister of Finance if he has made arrangements to meet with the president of the national housebuilders association to discuss this matter and see if there is any possibility of extending the same treatment.
(Translation).


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Prime Minister. Has he considered the serious effects of the imposition of the 11 per cent sales tax on building materials, which will result not only in a sharp rise in rents, but also in an increased cost of living?
(Text):


Lester Bowles Pearson: Yes, Mr. Speaker, these matters have all been considered.


Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, I direct my question to the Minister of Finance and I regret that I have not had the opportunity to give him prior notice of it. In view of the fact the excise department has notified manufacturers of prefabricated homes that the 11 per cent sales tax applies to the total retail package and not just to the material content, is the minister considering a change in these regulations which will correct this inequitable situation?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: I will be glad to look into that matter, Mr. Speaker; I am not familiar with it.



VOCATIONAL TRAINING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Arnold Webster (Vancouver-Kingsway):: I have a question for the Minister of Labour. In view of the fact that 70 per cent of Canadian youth never complete high school, and leave without adequate preparation for entry into business or industry, has the department any plans for a campaign this summer to persuade more students to enrol next fall for training in one of the vocational or technical institutions maintained by federal grants?


Mr. Speaker:: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member but that is a question for the order paper.



SHIPBUILDING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Has the minister received a telegram from Mr. Rene Barras, secretary of the Union of Shipyard Workers of Lauzon, Inc., protesting the construction in Japan of 18 cargo ships at the cost of one billion dollars for the transport of Canadian ore, and requesting a government representative at the next union meeting to explain the downward movement of their contracts? If so, what reply has been made?


George James McIlraith: No such telegram was received by the Minister of Transport. However, one was received at noon, sent to his parliamentary secretary. I have seen it, but no reply has been prepared as yet.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Would the minister care to make a statement regarding this action by the Canadian Javelin Company in placing this order in Japan for these cargo ships?


George James McIlraith: Not at this time, other than to say that this appears to be a private transaction between two private corporations over which the government has no control. However, I want to have the matter looked into. I am not sure that it is one exclusively for the Minister of Transport; other departments may be concerned. I will have the whole matter looked into, and a fuller reply will be given at a later date.

(Translation):



INCOME TAX


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerard Laprise (Chapleau):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Revenue. Could he tell the house whether the income tax office in Rouyn has been directed to scrutinize very closely the receipts for charitable donations? An investigation bordering on hysteria is being carried out at present in that district.
(Text):


Hon. J. R. Garland (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to thank the hon. member for his courtesy in advising my office that he intended to ask this question. I should like to tell him that in the ordinary course of verifying the tax returns filed by taxpayers residing in the district, the Rouyn district office and indeed other district offices throughout Canada have been examining and verifying the authenticity of supporting documents such as charitable donation receipts, medical receipts, etc., filed by taxpayers in support of deductions for income tax. There have been cases where the receipts filed in support of charitable donations have been questioned, and those organizations which issued the receipts have been visited to establish the authenticity of the receipt. There have been no special instructions issued to the Rouyn office of the taxation division in this regard, but the staff there have been performing their duties according to the usual procedure followed each year for the checking of tax returns.



COLUMBIA RIVER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources based on my question yesterday and his reply to it. I ask it because it is of national, current and urgent importance, Mr. Speaker.
In view of the continued requests from many interested organizations across Canada, engineers and other persons, for the latest information with respect to the estimated costs of the construction and related costs of dams proposed in the Columbia river treaty, and particularly the high Arrow dam, has the minister any unofficial figures he can give 28902-5-86
Inquiries of the Ministry us or any other information that will answer these inquiries, which are streaming in every day?


Hon. Arihur Laing (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the hon. member on his diligence in this matter. Yesterday I replied to him that the only official estimates that we had in respect of the construction costs of the dams were those which were included in an answer that was made on December 3, 1962. He will recall that in respect of the three dams which were mentioned in the entire project at that time there had been a constant upward curve of costs to the extent that I think the involvement of the three dams increased by some $54 million in one year. I think there is a certain feeling in the country that that percentage of increase will continue. But he will agree with me, of course, that we cannot go by conjecture.
I want to tell the hon. member that I have been informed that more recent studies and investigations have been undertaken by the province of British Columbia through agencies which they employed, and I think he will agree with me that since they employed these agencies the findings are their property. Therefore I think it would be highly improper for me to attempt to obtain those figures or to take responsibility for them before this house.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: A supplementary question. Has the minister heard from some reliable sources or from conversations that the cost of the high Arrow dam has now increased from $72 million to $124 million?


Arthur Laing: No, Mr. Speaker, I did not hear the latter figure.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: The figure was $124 million.


Arthur Laing: Yes, I heard the hon. member, but I have not heard that figure mentioned.



PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Colin Cameron (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands):: Mr. Speaker, I have a pedestrian question of no national importance whatever for the Minister of Public Works. He will recall that I wrote to him some time ago asking if he would investigate the possibility of installing some ventilating or air conditioning device in the elevators of the building, because in the hot weather it becomes an intolerable task for those who operate the elevators. I wonder if he is in a position to answer now.


Mr. Howard:: Especially with people
smoking.

Inquiries of the Ministry Hon. J. P. Deschaielefs (Minister of Public Works): No, Mr. Speaker, but the matter will be looked into and I will report in the next few days.
(Translation):



ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to ask a question of the Minister of Justice but, in his absence, I will direct it to the Prime Minister. Is he aware that a resident of Hull is being sought by the R.C.M.P. and that he refuses to submit to the warrant for his arrest because it is written in English only?
(Text):


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of the case. If the hon. gentleman would give me details I will be glad to look into it. I am sure the man in question is reluctant to be imprisoned on a warrant in any language.
(Translation):


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, may I explain the meaning of my question? It deals with a traffic violation which the said individual committed on parliament hill. Afterwards, a summons and a warrant for arrest, drawn up in English only, were delivered to the R.C.M.P. to be served to the accused. Could the Prime Minister tell us whether the warrants of the R.C.M.P. are drawn up in both languages?
(Text):


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker, but I will be glad to look into it.



PUBLIC SERVICE

[Stage Direction]
INQUIRY AS TO SALARY INCREASES FOR CERTAIN [DOT]	CLASSES
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Is the minister now in a position to indicate when the overdue pay increases will become effective for certain categories of the public service?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: Mr. Speaker, I regret that I seem to have been a little busy in the last few days and I have not had a chance to get down to that matter, but I am very anxious to do so.


Stanley Howard Knowles: A supplementary question. Is the minister in a position to make any [Mr. Howard.l
report to us on his meeting with the representatives of the civil service organizations?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: We had a meeting on Friday the 14th. It was a very good meeting, but I think it would be inappropriate to discuss what went on at that meeting until we reach a conclusion.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister. This being day No. 59 in the life of the government, can the Prime Minister indicate whether the other pieces of legislation to which he referred last week will appear on the order paper by tomorrow, and will they include the pension legislation?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentleman will look at Votes and Proceedings for tomorrow he will find some additional resolutions which will be of interest to him.



THE BUDGET


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, June 13, consideration of the motion of Hon. Walter L. Gordon (Minister of Finance) that Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair for the house to go into committee of ways and means.
Hon. George C. Nowlan (Digby-Annapolis-Kings):: Mr. Speaker, in resuming the adjourned debate, before dealing with the budget proper I should like at the outset to comment briefly on the situation which was disclosed in the House of Commons last Friday respecting the participation in the preparation of the budget of alleged experts from outside the public service. This is in no way an attack on any individual and certainly not on the minister or those associated with him. If there were any wrongdoing, this debate would not be necessary as, of course, the minister would have resigned and the ones who are responsible and who are associated with him would have earned the dishonour and disrespect of their fellow Canadians. In this connection there is no such development at the moment and I am sure, as I hope and believe, that there will not be any. However, the fact that integrity is not one of the issues at the moment does not make the matter any less serious. It is not the integrity of the minister but rather his judgment or his lack of it that is under attack, a mistake in judgment which goes to the very root of our

system of government. In this connection I would suggest that everyone should read- and I am sure most hon. members have done so-the article by I. Norman Smith in the Ottawa Journal of Monday last. It is not necessary for me to tell this house that Mr. Smith is no Conservative partisan in any way, shape or form.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


George Clyde Nowlan: It would be a great tribute to him if he were. However, I am afraid he does not deserve that tribute. In very moving, forceful and eloquent language he has expressed his contempt for a wrong done to our system of governmental financial control and the reflection on and the insult to our civil service.
There are those who suggest that it is perfectly proper for the Minister of Finance to receive advice on matters affecting the budget. I think those who attempt to defend this action on that ground have missed the point entirely. Of course, there is no objection to the receiving by the Minister of Finance of advice in connection with the budget. Even if he did not desire it, he could not help but get it, as for weeks beforehand he is deluged with delegations and representatives of all sorts of associations and groups who are putting their proposals before him, and properly so. During the year he receives scores and, I presume, hundreds of letters, some of which are wise and some not quite so wise, making suggestions as to changes which should be made in the tax system. To receive such advice, to listen to it, to consider it and even to request it is perfectly proper conduct on the part of the Minister of Finance. He could and should do no less. However, that is an entirely different thing from not only having received advice but having brought into his office employees of a financial house not only to give advice but to prepare and to help to write the budget while still on the payroll, as at least some of them were, of these financial houses that obviously are directly concerned with the provisions of the budget.
This is so contrary to our tradition, our practice, and our principles that it seems absolutely incomprehensible that it could have happened. However, it did happen. I suggest with all deference that it can be explained only by the fact that it was done by a minister who has not been in this house so long that he has acquired the traditions and the background of this house, or the principles under which all governments have operated in the past. I do not think the public generally realize the way in which secrecy has always been a traditional part of the making of a 28902-5-86J
The Budget-Mr. Nowlan budget. The drafting is done in various sections, no one of which can be connected with another so that one can understand what is being done. Gradually after draft upon draft have been prepared, these are finally brought together and in the office of the deputy minister of finance and possibly one assistant deputy and two or three of the senior private secretaries, the final work of compiling the draft of the budget is done. That is the accepted practice arising out of a long history and a long tradition indicating the absolute necessity of avoiding a leak, consciously or unconsciously and of assuring the public that the Minister of Finance, like Caesar's wife, is above suspicion. As hon. members well know, we take the precaution of locking up the press gallery until the minister of finance delivers his speech, as today it has an impact on every man and every woman in all walks of life and upon all the facets of our economy.
May I refer to the budget proposal which I understand has been withdrawn this afternoon. I have here a memorandum which explains the statement which I could not quite hear when the minister read it. If that budget proposal were still in effect or is to be renewed, it would have applied to the sale of shares worth over $50,000 on the stock market in any one day. To you or to me, Mr. Speaker or at least to me, $50,000 is a fairly substantial sum of money. However, I know that to a good many people it is not a major expenditure. If on Thursday morning or Wednesday there had been negotiated a sale of, shall we say $1 million worth of shares of a certain corporation,-and I am told that is a fairly frequent practice on many days- there would have been no tax. On Friday, if that were done, under the wicked legislation which has just now been withdrawn there would have been a tax of $300,000. One can easily see the impact that this budget might have had without any question of any relief whatsoever.
I am saying again that we are not questioning the integrity of any individual. However, our whole system of government is under attack as all hon. members in this house know. We hear altogether too many insinuations, suggestions, and references to the fact that the big shots, those on the inside, are able to make the money and that the little fellow, the ones on the outside, are being exploited by those on the inside. Sometimes there may be some merit in that criticism, but often I suggest it is without foundation. However, action such as this which has been carried out in this particular connection will certainly add fuel to those suggestions. All one needs to do is to walk up and down the streets of Ottawa during the days after the

The Budget-Mr. Nowlan budget was disclosed. All one had to do was to ride in a taxicab in the city, in order to find that feeling being expressed bitterly and affirmatively.
Just as important as are all these matters is the effect this action has had or might have had-and I believe to some extent has had-upon our senior civil servants. I can speak, I think, with a little bit of authority, of the service in the Department of National Revenue where I spent several happy years, and also with the civil servants of the Department of Finance with whom unfortunately I could not spend as much time as I should have liked to do. One cannot speak too highly of the quality of these civil servants. It is a well known fact that the officials of the Department of Finance have always been responsible for the final preparation or drafting and the discussion which ended in the culmination of the budget.
May I again refer to that article by I. Norman Smith which appeared the other night. As he says, and I am now not quoting but merely paraphrasing his language: the top men in the Department of Finance bring to the preparation of the budget a knowledge and instinct of where we have come from and where we are going. There is a process, a progress in governing a country which the brightest of "outside" minds cannot be expected to understand or even see. That statement, in my opinion, very succinctly expresses the opinion of the department. Through years of practical experience and through their association with many brilliant minds which have gone before them-one could name them but I will not do so now; I refer to ministers and deputy ministers- these persons, with their knowledge of the problems, and particularly as perhaps we have had a clear example today, of the pitfalls, which confront a budget maker or the manufacturer of a budget, bring to the minister assistance in the preparation of a budget which is next to perfection. This perfection is apparently lacking in the budget presented by the minister last Thursday night. As 1 said, no greater proof of that could be brought forward than the amazing retreat that took place here this afternoon.
As I said the other evening, this budget is a confusion of platitudes and partisanship. On reading it, I can see where there are some matters of substance to it, but that is on a hit and miss basis. It only underlies the lack of experience of the minister's new braintrust which was substituted for his civil servants. Now, from the knowledge I have of what has gone on in the past in the preparation of budgets, and from the reading of the form and content of this budget, and knowing something of the style and manner of writing

of these senior officers of the department, I think I can say without any question whatever that the senior officers of the department had very little, if anything, to do with the final drafting of this budget.
The minister says he takes full responsibility for the preparation of the budget. Of course, he does. All of his cabinet colleagues have to do likewise because that is a matter of cabinet responsibility. The minister had better take responsibility for it because, having disregarded the reputation for efficiency of the senior officers, having disregarded what his actions could have done or may have done to the morale of these officers, I doubt if he could expect them to accept too much responsibility for the other provisions which are probably just as vulnerable as the one which was withdrawn this afternoon.
I should like to quote from Mr. Smith's article again, and with this I will complete my remarks on this aspect of the matter.
That is why the opposition parties in the Commons have a duty to denounce the wrong in the strongest terms and demand from Mr. Gordon a full apology in such unequivocal terms that the precedent that has been set will be a precedent to ensure it never will recur.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I will turn to the budget itself, or what is left of the budget. I do not suppose any official critic was ever in this position. Perhaps no official critic ever had such a tribute paid to his prowess. Having spoken for some 15 or 16 minutes the other evening, before he gets an opportunity to speak again he finds that the main elements of the budget have been withdrawn. One wonders whether that is a tribute to the prowess of the member of the parliament or the stock exchange. It is certainly an amazing development. If this were a resolution which had been brought forward, I feel, sir, you would have to take a look at the rules to ascertain whether or not the house had been seized with this resolution and whether it could be withdrawn at this stage without unanimous consent. I do not believe that, technically, this is a resolution, per se. This was a draft section of a bill of which notice was given, and on a future date the Excise Tax Act would be amended by adding certain sections to it.
I feel it is a rather interesting question, Mr. Speaker, as to whether or not that practice is one which is in accordance with our rules. I am not raising any objection to it at the moment. However, I wanted to mention it because if one is confronted with the responsibility of speaking on matters on the assumption that the house has been seized with them, and yet before one has had an opportunity to complete his speech on these very critical matters he finds they have been

withdrawn, great difficulty is created. This matter, upon which one might have devoted a great deal of time has now been removed, for my present purpose at any rate. This may be a good thing for the house. I shall not speak at as great a length as I had intended to speak, not that I had intended to speak at any great length. Conversely, of course, I would not have had to burn the midnight oil studying that section, had I known this action was going to take place this afternoon.
It is a good thing it did because I hope this is the first step toward various other retreats that the minister should make. Just before coming into the chamber, and before I heard about this retreat, I received a note to the effect that the stock exchange had gone off 9.95 points up until 2.30 this afternoon. Then at 2.40 after the announcement was made in the house, the stock market started climbing again. How far it has climbed, I do not know. I assume that fortunes have been made on this rise this afternoon.


Some hon. Members:: Shame, shame.


George Clyde Nowlan: I think some reference should be made to this matter. I am making no suggestions whatever, but tomorrow morning we will see what the figures are in respect of the stock exchange transactions. According to what I have heard, the stock market is boiling and the inference is fairly obvious.


An hon. Member:: Smears.


George Clyde Nowlan: There is no smear whatever. One does not have to smear when you see stupid procedures taken from which the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) has had to retreat.
As I have said, there are many comments I should make about the budget, but they have certainly been shortened by what has happened today. I had intended to spend a considerable part of the time on this particular matter. There are other matters I could have developed, such as the withholding tax, the club and the carrot which are held out at certain times. I could have developed other aspects but I will have to leave them for other speakers. I have not sufficient notes in front of me to develop these points satisfactorily this afternoon.
As I have said, the budget was a confusion of partisanship and platitudes. There were also gimmicks in it. There were some good points as well. I had a telephone call yesterday, as a matter of fact I had a great many telephone calls. I have never been the financial critic before, Mr. Speaker, so I do not know how many calls a financial critic usually receives. I received scores of them yesterday from all over Canada, from St.
The Budget-Mr. Nowlan John's, Newfoundland to Vancouver, criticizing the various sections of the budget. There was criticism not only of the provision which was withdrawn this afternoon but others as well. One person suggested that this budget should be called "government by gimmick". There are a lot of gimmicks in it, Mr. Speaker, a lot of window dressing. If one reads it carefully, he sees so much window dressing and so much difficulty in administering any sort of positive program set forth, that he wonders if it is not all window dressing. In fact, after one examines all the various provisions he finds the budget creates a picture of speedy dissolution and an election before the people find out how difficult it would be to administer.
There are some positive notes, of course, like the disallowance of the $5,000 car capital cost. This certainly is a concrete proposal and one which I think is worthy of commendation, certainly by all of us who do not own $5,000 cars. I do not believe our revenue position will be improved very much by this provision, but I am sure the minister was not expecting that. However, it would go to some extent towards redressing the adverse balance of payments. I think it is one definite program, and a good one. Then, in the next breath, you get this reference to the cost of living, to expense accounts and the general expressions of piety and being against sin.
Then it goes on to say that the government is directing the Department of National Revenue to tighten up its administration and enforce the law. I suggest if the government has to direct the deputy minister to that end, then it should ask for his resignation. If he is inefficient, if he is not carrying out the law, it should ask for his resignation. But it will not do that because members of the government know the administration is efficient.
Looking around the house I can see a good many faces, not all on this side of the house, who came to me on more than one occasion when I was Minister of National Revenue, sometimes with tears, sometimes with imprecations, condemning the tightness of the administration of the department and suggesting it should be relaxed rather than tightened. I know my predecessor, the former hon. member for Eglinton, made some reference to this a couple of years ago. I am sure whatever could be done was done at that time with respect to these expense accounts but, if there is going to be an enforcement of the law, then let the Minister of Finance bring forward regulations. Let him say, for instance, that you Mr. Speaker, as Speaker of the House of Commons, are entitled to a meal of a certain quality and a certain cost, and that I, as a poor, down-trodden member

The Budget-Mr. Nowlan of the opposition only have the right to charge up a meal in a Childs restaurant.
Officials in the United States have a set of regulations governing expense accounts. As a matter of fact I think they run to three or four volumes, but I am not advocating that here. I think our system is somewhat better, but I do not like to see references to enforcement or tightening up the administration, which reflect on officials who have carried out their very difficult work in the best possible manner.
Is there anything they can do other than what they are doing? How do you deal with expense accounts? The assessor brings in a person whose account looks suspiciously large. If it is big enough and the case is bad enough I presume it comes before the deputy minister or the assessors here in Ottawa, and the parties sit down and discuss it across a desk. The officials say they think it is too large, and the person replies no. After the discussion is over, then the assessment is made, and the person has to go to the appeal court or the exchequer court if he wants to take the matter further. That course of procedure is followed every day in the week by the departmental officials and I think their efficiency is very good indeed.
As I said before, because of the statement made by the minister earlier, I can now dispose of half my notes; but there are several other matters I wish to deal with. The provision which was withdrawn this afternoon is not the only one causing concern to the business community, and to our trading partners and friends in the United States and throughout the world at large.
During the days since the budget came down, and particularly yesterday and today, I have received telephone calls from various businessmen throughout Canada, men who are engaged in large enterprises and who are engaged in big underwritings. That is to say, they are financing capital projects, and the underwritings run into scores of millions of dollars. In many cases these underwritings are being negotiated in the United States, and in several cases everything was closed except for the signing of the documents.
One particular underwriting for $15 million was to be signed on Monday, but now the firm advancing the capital in the United States has telephoned and said the deal has to be indefinitely suspended. He said the people they were associated with had to review their whole policy towards lending and advancing money. That particular deal may be renewed some time in the future, or it might not.
These are only a half dozen cases which have been brought to my attention by telephone, and I accept the word of the people

who called me. There is no reason that they should be misleading me. It may be that the withdrawal of the provision this afternoon will ameliorate that situation, but in the statement given to me by the parliamentary secretary a little while ago it says that the matter is under review. I am not going to read the statement into the record. I presume the minister did that, although I was not in the house at the time, but the statement says: It may take a little time to work out satisfactorily the difficulties referred to.
This is confusion worse confounded. At present we have an almost impossible section so far as administration is concerned, but at least you know the devil you are facing. Now, however, he is obscured in brimstone and you do not know what devil is going to emerge from it. You may be swapping the devil for a witch. There may be more doubt, confusion and hesitancy on this matter thar. ever before.
If this suspension and cancellation of underwritings continues, running into scores and perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars, the government will create unemployment, and this, Mr. Speaker, is the government which was dedicated to providing full employment. It is going to create unemployment and it is going to bring on, possibly bring on at any rate, a recession, and maybe a depression which will make those of the immediate past seem very small indeed.
I have just received a note from a colleague behind me. I am not sure whether this is an original thought or is something somebody told him, but it has a great deal in it. Why withdraw the provision 20 minutes before the stock markets in Toronto closed today? Why withdraw it at that time and have the markets boiling again? It was a rather injudicious act and due notice should be taken of it.
As I have said, I have not got my notes in front of me dealing with the clubs, carrots, threats and promises contained in the budget with respect to withholding taxes because I did not expect to have time to deal with them. Many of these are based on renegotiation of treaties that are not yet renegotiated and which we might not be able to renegotiate. This is the first time I have seen prophecies coming down in a budget, saying what the government is going to do one, two and three years from now. If this administrative efficiency and if this is the correct presentation of a budget, then I am very glad I did not have to present one.
I have one quotation from an editorial, and I know the opening line will cause a laugh from my hon. friends opposite. It is from yesterday's New York Times, which as we all know is a pretty responsible, well-read

paper, and one which is usually entitled to, and receives the respect of everyone. As I say, the opening line will cause a laugh across the aisle, but not the end of the sentence. It reads:
Mr. John Diefenbaker, who campaigned on a frankly anti-American platform,-
I deny that.
-can make the valid complaint that the first budget drawn up by Canada's Liberal government has stolen his thunder. The Liberals new antiforeign tax proposals-
Not one proposal, Mr. Speaker, but proposals.
-may appear somewhat more palatable coming from Prime Minister Lester Pearson, an avowed friend of the United States, but they are no less disturbing. In setting up barriers against foreign investment, Canada is adopting a form of protectionism that represents a retreat to economic nationalism.
I commend this editorial to all hon. members. It is fairly long and I know, Mr. Speaker, you would not want me to read it all. I am reading only one or two short excerpts, but for the edification of hon. -members opposite, particularly those on the treasury benches, I suggest they go down to the reading room and read this editorial in full, and also in today's issue the dispatch of the New York Times reporter in the gallery, giving in some detail the, let us say, friendly discussions which took place last night between the president of the Montreal stock exchange and the Minister of Finance.
This article in a United States newspaper is very interesting. I am glad to see that at least the Minister of Finance has been able to get some editorial comment on this news story, which is normally sadly lacking. The editorial says:
But waving the flag of nationalism will not accelerate Canada's development. For though Canada is independent, its growth is intimately connected with the course of the American economy. Its new discriminatory measures appear calculated to alienate and disrupt this relationship, with adverse effects for Canada. American firms already established in Canada cannot move their plants, but they may be less inclined to continue reinvesting their profits: and prospective investors cannot be expected to risk their capital if they are placed at a disadvantage.
The Canadians have every right to choose their own way to control their destiny. But the way Mr. Pearson has chosen will hurt the Canadian economy and the Canadian people.
That, sir, is a statement which I think is not a partisan Conservative one. It comes from the New York Times, which is recognized all over the world. As I said, the cancellations and suspensions which have already been made may result in tremendous unemployment and cancellation of financial
The Budget-Mr. Nowlan arrangements. That is, of course, a matter for the future and we will watch it carefully.
The application of the tax to compel the acquisition by Canadians of 25 per cent of foreign corporations is going to be most difficult, if not impossible, to administer. The desire is very laudable. I suppose one would like to see all corporations in Canada controlled by Canadians, but we know that is very, very difficult. Indeed, it is impossible today. We have gone a long way along this road of control by outside interests. I am not criticizing the philosophy, shall I say, that underlies this measure, but I am criticizing the measure itself which is proposed.
Mr. Meyer, the financial editor of the Montreal Gazette, points out that you have to get 25 per cent of the shares of a corporation. If they are controlled by bona fide Canadians who are resident in Canada, then certain benefits are going to flow from that. If they are not, the government is going to use a club rather than a carrot. How do we know where the 25 per cent share which was here yesterday is going to be tomorrow. Canadians can buy a 25 per cent control of a corporation; they can have their shares registered and they can be sold either surreptitiously or directly on the market, and instead of having 25 per cent you may be down to 20 per cent or less. I am sure there are occasions where this does happen.
We have a provision with respect to Canadian directors. It is that we shall have Canadian directors who are resident in Canada and are Canadian citizens. As I have said, that is laudable and desirable. I hope it works. But every hon. member of this house who has had any connection with business at all knows that you can have directors who are representing, not their own interests but the holders of securities who are somewhere in the background and do not want to have their identity revealed. There are many cases, as we know, of men who are perfectly reputable and honourable, and good Canadian citizens, who are to all intents and purposes nominal directors representing some other interests in some other place. To suggest that you can achieve the desired end by simply having a Canadian citizen become a director of a corporation is, I suggest, with all due respect to the minister, window dressing and a sham; it has no reality or meaning whatsoever.
I read the budget speech on a couple of occasions. It did not grow on me as I read it, but I thought there were several things missing. I am not going to deal today with the problems of education and finance with which the minister told us he is confronted,

The Budget-Mr. Nowlan because one could argue on these matters one way or the other. But I was rather amazed to find there was no reference at all in the budget speech to the Canada development corporation. I thought this would be the stick, the carrot or the club when you are talking about Canadians taking over corporations controlled in the United States and other foreign controlled operations. The minister has been very proud and has boasted of his ideas. They are his ideas, he having been chairman of a royal commission years ago and having advocated some steps for the takeover by Canadians of United States controlled corporations. I do not think he found in his other colleagues in the royal commission the support that he expected. But he has been talking about it and one of his ideas was brought forward in his book "Troubled Canada". I refer to the setting up of the Canada development corporation to purchase shares, because without such a corporation I think we all realize there is not enough equity money here to do anything like what is needed to make this objective a reality. There was not a mention of it in the budget speech. The Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) said this afternoon that when we look at Votes and Proceedings for tomorrow we find a reference to a resolution coming forward dealing with the Canada development corporation. However, I was surprised that it was not in the budget. I think it would possibly strengthen the reaching of this objective; at least, it would have balanced it out if there were other factors which go hand in hand with this proposal.
There are people here who are not too far away from the sound of my voice-I refer to some of the representatives in the press gallery-who, as my old friend Jim Macdon-nell used to say, are very knowledgeable fellows. I wonder whether this omission from the budget speech was due to the modesty of one of the speech writers employed to do the job, because according to reports one of those speech writers is to become the head of the Canada development corporation. Perhaps that is one reason for him not wanting the matter included in the budget speech which he helped prepare. I suggest it is a rather peculiar situation if that did not happen.
Dealing further with the takeover by Canadians of corporations in this country, the argument is advanced that if they are controlled from outside, in the end our whole industry may be controlled from outside. That is the philosophy, of course, underlying this whole approach. I doubt whether that philosophy holds good. I think you have to distinguish between one corporation and

another. Some of us from the maritime provinces at least, I am sure, have at times heard the opinion expressed that the greatest damage done to our own local economy was the takeover practised by corporations, not from the United States but from other parts of Canada, which came down to the mari-times, purchased the plants and then closed them up and moved them somewhere else. This might have been in the interests of efficiency-it probably was-but there is certainly a feeling In some places that this caused a great deal of our difficulty. Therefore there is not an entirely unanimous feeling with respect to takeover.
There are many United States corporations, and corporations controlled by other interests as well, which are doing a remarkably good job in this country. I have in my own constituency two such corporations, one that was brought in last year and one the year before. They are employing hundreds of people and are contributing tremendously to the economy of the country. Certainly if there was any suggestion in this area that these corporations should be penalized or punished because they are not wholly or partly owned by Canadians, I think the reaction would not be very favourable.
This is a shotgun approach. Perhaps it has to be. All are either good or they are bad. I suggest there are good corporations which are not entirely Canadian owned or even 25 per cent Canadian controlled. I think if the hon. gentleman suggested to anyone in this house or in Canada during the winter time that Imperial Oil on hockey night was a bad Canadian citizen he would be likely to get his eyes blackened, because, undoubtedly, Imperial Oil in that sporting facet, as in many others, has been a remarkably good Canadian citizen. As I understand it, Imperial Oil has about 20 per cent of its ownership in Canada, about 8 per cent outside the North American continent and the rest in the United States. So it would not be easy for that corporation, even if it saw fit to do so, to become a technical Canadian citizen of the kind suggested. It seems to me it is just as good a Canadian citizen now as it would be after it had found 2 or 3 per cent more stock for sale to this country.
There are pension funds galore. There is no danger about the purchase of pension funds. Pension funds do not seek control; they seek only an equity interest in various corporations across the board and I suggest that even though we should try to restrict the outright purchase by corporations of controlling interests or even of huge minority

interests in Canadian companies, this problem does not arise with respect to pension funds which are widely diversified and have only a relatively small proportion of their money invested in any one corporate fund. There are scores of them-I could name them, but I am not going to put the names on the record-which cannot comply because they do not have 25 per cent ownership in Canada. One wonders, again, which are the good boys and which are the bad boys. Is Imperial Oil bad? Is C.I.L. bad? I could go down the list but I do not intend to go into it now. I think I have made my point, for the moment, in connection with this matter.
Of course, we all realize we are dealing with the subject at a preliminary stage only. The resolutions will come before the committee in detail at a later date-if the government is still here; if it does not have to withdraw all of them-and we shall have the opportunity of discussing them on an analytical basis as compared with the more rotund manner in which I am dealing with them at the moment. It has to be remembered, when we are talking about these companies, that this is not a one way street. One would think, to hear some people talk, that no one in Canada owned corporations outside at all. But I need not remind some hon. members within the sound of my voice that there are a number of Canadian corporations which wholly own and operate subsidiaries in the United States. This is a two way street, and if we put pressure on United States subsidiaries here, what is going to be *done to Canadian corporations operating profitably below the border at the present time and giving employment not only to Americans but to many Canadians?
I understand it was with the encouragement of hon. gentlemen opposite in the days when they were in power and, certainly, of one prominent frontbencher in those days, that General Motors parent company sold shares to Canadians so as to show its Canadianism. But it has not got 25 per cent; it would take a lot of money to buy 25 per cent of those shares. Therefore, it is not a qualified corporation and will not be able to come within the ambit of these provisions, even for its pension funds.
There is another matter. In his budget speech, the Minister of Finance referred to what he called the proliferation of methods *of moving undistributed income from a corporation to the shareholders without payment of tax. The usual method, as some lawyers within the sound of my voice know, the historic one, is commonly called dividend 28902-5-87
The Budget-Mr. Nowlan stripping. There is no doubt that this practice has greatly increased within the last few years. It is one which, I think, should be controlled and there is a great deal of revenue being lost to the nation as a result of the techniques which have grown up. Dividend stripping is only one of these devices. As the Minister of Finance well knows, there are others which can be used to accomplish the same end. They are more cumbersome, perhaps, and they take longer, but this is a cumbersome and expensive procedure, anyway.
The minister intends to deal with these practices. He intends to give power to the Minister of National Revenue-and I quote him in outline-to look through so-called dividend stripping transactions and to deem shareholders to have received dividends in certain cases. Let us look at the relevant part of the resolution which the minister put on the record the other night. It is long and involved. It says that with respect to amounts received after June 13 which in the opinion of the minister had been received, or would be received thereafter, by reason, in whole or in part, of such transactions as I have mentioned, they shall, if the minister sees fit-and here I am simply sketching this part of the resolution-be deemed to be a dividend either in whole or in part. Have you ever heard, Mr. Speaker, of a more arbitrary power given to a minister, even to our genial friend the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Garland) ? Just consider what decisions he will have to make in this connection. This is power to tax, with a vengeance.


John George Diefenbaker: Administrative lawlessness.


George Clyde Nowlan: My right hon. friend, the Leader of the Opposition, says "administrative lawlessness". I think that is probably the most apt way of describing it. It is the most outstanding example of arbitrary power being vested in a minister that I have encountered since I first came to this house. You may remember, Mr. Speaker-the Secretary of State (Mr. Pickersgill) certainly remembers -that two years ago a great debate took place in this chamber about giving to the minister of national revenue a little power to deal with a very small fragment of the economy-power to declare goods to be of a certain class or kind, thereby helping to develop the economy of this country. For days and weeks we were subject to vituperation, abuse, and criticism of our proposal. It was said this was taxation without parliamentary authority. It was said this was taxation by the arbitrary acts of the minister of national revenue. We went back to the days of George III and before, and the high screams of the opposition were such that

The Budget-Mr. Nowlan they finally reached gentlemen in the other place and the proposal died there. We were trying to decide whether items in a limited category were of a class or kind made in Canada. Here we are dealing with vast sums amounting to many millions of dollars, yet we give to the Minister of National Revenue the power to rule as to the financial operations of scores of corporations.
It will involve scores and scores of corporations and he himself will have to determine, in whole or in part as he deems fit, whether or not it is a dividend. Mr. Speaker, have you ever heard a more far-reaching taxation measure? Talk about taxation without representation.
I can think of another example. Mr. Speaker, I am sure my hon. friends opposite remember the spring before last, and remember the surcharges and taxation by order in council, how wicked it was, and how we were deemed to be trespassing on the rights of parliament. If we pass this measure parliament will give the Minister of National Revenue greater power than any we sought to exercise. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that the amounts involved will run into millions and millions of dollars. The minister will find himself in the position of having to read the taxpayer's mind-because there is no other way of dealing with the matter-and determine whether a certain action was taken, in whole or in part, for the purpose of avoiding reduction in or elimination of certain taxes. Mr. Speaker, I have very great respect as an old, long time friend, for the Minister of National Revenue, but I doubt whether even he would profess to have tremendous ability in the art and skill of mind reading. There is an old classic saying in the English common law which I think all English common law lawyers learn straight away when they first go into law school. It has come down from the ranks of judges of 200 years ago, and it is that the devil himself knoweth not the mind of man. Apparently in this case the Minister of Finance is paying the Minister of National Revenue the compliment, by inference, that is smarter than the devil, anyway.
Now, the minister may argue that there is an appeal. I do not know whether he will, but he could make that argument. There is undoubtedly an appeal at any time from an assessment made by the minister, but in this case his assessment is based on his opinion, on the exercise of his discretion. As far as I can discover-and I have sought the advice of tax lawyers on this too, people who have had far greater experience than I and other lawyers-during the whole course of Canadian jurisprudence, from its beginnings until today,


where a discretion such as this has been: exercised honestly, as of course it would be,, the courts have, rightly or wrongly, refused to interfere with it. So to all intents and1 purposes there is no appeal whatsoever from this arbitrary power. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that this is one proposal which parliament should not pass either at this session or at any other.
This section is evil for another reason, and I use the word "evil" advisedly. In the days-before I came here, back in 1947, although I was here in 1948, there was a complete revision of the Income Tax Act. At that time the act was replete with discretionary powers. One deputy minister of that day spent most of his time writing decisions on the exercise of discretion, and it became a matter which attracted the attention of the then minister of finance, hon. members here and members in another place. A great deal of study was given to this problem of discretion, Mr. Speaker, and you will find a very interesting report of the matter in the proceedings of another place. As a result, all the discretions of the minister which were then in existence, with possibly one exception, were removed from the act because it was recognized that it was a bad policy and should not be continued. So the discretions went out of the act and the minister administered the act and the act alone. If the taxpayer had any complaint or any trouble, he went to the appeal board. This was the theory of it: the income tax appeal board was set up at that time so that, in the event of a dispute with the minister, one could go to the board cheaply- although cheapness did not always materialize.
Now it is proposed to have incorporated in the Income Tax Act a discretion which I think is greater than any discretion ever previously in the act. I say that this proposal is wrong and is one which should not be passed by this parliament.


John Richard Garland: Would the hon. gentleman permit a question?


George Clyde Nowlan: Certainly.


John Richard Garland: In his comparison of the class or kind legislation which was introduced by his administration, or the administration of which he was a member, does he not. recognize the fact there was no appeal there.


George Clyde Nowlan: That was the basis of the argument I am attempting to make, although apparently I have not done it very well, to establish in the mind of the Minister of National Revenue the fact that to all intents and purposes there is no appeal here. There cannot be any appeal. There is only a technical appeal from an assessment. Any lawyer who has had anything to do with:

income tax matters knows what that means. With an assessment based on the exercise of a discretion, to all intents and purposes there is no appeal. This situation is therefore exactly on all fours with the problem we had two years ago when dealing with class or kind, except that then we were dealing with relatively minor and small matters of machinery and equipment, reference to which might come before the minister from time to time. But in this case we will be dealing with millions and millions of dollars, and I must say that I feel very sorry for the Minister of National Revenue. Just think, Mr. Speaker, of the pressure which is going to be brought to bear on him by all sorts of interested parties, lawyers, accountants and other people, claiming that theirs is a case where he should exercise his discretion. And that may or may not be correct. The lines may be blurred, they may be confused. There are not too many blacks or too many whites in these cases. They are often confused, and I would hate to see anybody for whom I cared put in this position or to be there myself as minister of national revenue. As I say, I think this provision should be withdrawn.
As I said at the beginning, the government is trying to achieve a purpose which I think is desirable. It is trying to achieve the avoidance of income tax payments. But there are other methods, as the minister knows full well, which could be used, particularly in clearing up this great reserve of undistributed income which is perhaps at the root of it all. The minister said the other day that he was sorry to hear that the royal commission on taxation was not going to report until 1965. I did not know that until he said so the other night. I have no doubt that problems have arisen, illness and so on, which have slowed down the operations of that commission. I am very happy to have had some part in constituting the commission. I personally persuaded Mr. Carter, rather against his will I think, to accept the very onerous task of chairman, and the country owes him a debt for accepting that. The government of which I was a member set up this commission because they realized that there had to be long term changes made in the act and that it was high time they were made. But in the very order in council by which we set up that royal commission, Mr. Speaker, we provided that they would be dealing with taxation law as it then existed and thereafter existed. In other words, we gave scope to the government of the day to amend the act and to take such action as they saw fit, regardless of the fact that the royal commission was sitting at the time. I suggest that there are other procedures in this particular case which the Minister of Finance could 28902-5-87|
The Budget-Mr. Nowlan have taken which would have accomplished substantially the same thing and which would not have involved the minister in this terrible position in which he will find himself, as well as involve us in going back to provisions about discretions.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I have gone over several of the resolutions. Perhaps the most important one of all from the standpoint of the average Canadian citizen is the one dealing with the application of the sales tax. The minister gave notice the other night that the sales tax act was going to be amended by lifting certain exemptions which heretofore had applied. With very few exceptions all building materials and productive machinery and equipment would be subject to an 11 per cent sales tax. This is a very ironical situation. We talked about efficiency of administration. We talked about mismanagement the other night. The minister spoke about the mismanagement of the Conservative government. If you wish to see a really good example of efficiency in administration look at this one. I think we should have had a photographic reproduction. If this had happened in Hollywood no one would have believed it. We had the Minister of Labour (Mr. MacEachen) standing up one day and offering to the house builder $500 for building a house in the middle of the winter while two or three days later we had the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) standing up and saying that he is going to tax that same man more than $500.


An hon. Member:: Ring around the rosy.


George Clyde Nowlan: That certainly is efficiency for you; there is no question about it. I must hurry on. We must remember also that building material not only applies to houses but: also to all sorts of construction. The tremendous cost which is going to follow on this proposal is something which I do not think any of us can completely envisage at the moment.


An hon. Member:: Hospitals and schools.


George Clyde Nowlan: Yes, hospitals, schools and bridges possibly. We have seen representations already from hydro construction in British Columbia applying for exemptions. Not only is there the matter of building material. However, the emphasis has been laid there because, of course, the building material people were well organized and I do not criticize them for that. That is their function. However, production machinery and equipment come under this imposition as well, and the cost of production machinery and equipment is not chicken feed. It runs into hundreds of millions of dollars. The increased tax on that amount, as the minister pointed

The Budget-Mr. Nowlan out in his preliminary estimate, is going to be very substantial indeed. All of this is to be added to the cost of construction and the cost of development, including not only the building of the houses, but repairs.
Since the budget came down the other night I have had two telephone calls from my own province from two relatively small contractors who said they did not build houses in the wintertime but had accepted the advice of the minister of labour in the past and adopted the slogan of doing it now and that they had arranged for a substantially big business in repairs and renovations, painting and all the rest of it, and that the interior work was done during the winter months. All of that will be subject to 11 per cent sales tax and there is no $500 handout for painting the kitchen sink or anything of that kind. One could go on and on in speaking of these matters.
However, I do not wish to labour the point. I say to you, Mr. Speaker, that this increased burden of taxation is serious. Last night an economist told me that he figured that now a family man with two children and with $5,000 income was paying out more in taxes indirectly than he would be paying in direct taxation, and probably it would be higher in the $5,000 bracket. That shows the scope of the proposal. As I said, the matter has been mentioned in the press. We all get representations in connection with it. That is a usual thing. We expect them. But I think these representations have real merit, as I suggest to you that this proposal is going to result in reduced employment in the wintertime instead of increased employment, something which is absolutely contrary to what is required. Allan gives and Walter taketh away: blessed be the name of Michael. What sort of administrative set-up is this? If anyone can tell me that, I should like him to do so. What they do not withdraw, they put in a crib and I think we are going to get widespread unemployment because of it. The budget of course, recognizes that fact. I think the minister recognized it. You will notice, Mr. Speaker, that it was said we were at dead centre, that the economy was lagging, and that we had been guilty of mismanagement. However, his white paper showed that the increase in the gross national product last year, the one just closed, was 8 per cent or a little bit over 8 per cent. If you discount what he termed the cost of living you get an increase of only 6.5 or 6.6 per cent in the national product, a figure greater than it had been for years. In the budget this year, what does he say? He is budgeting for a 5 per cent increase in the gross national product, with 1.5 per cent cost of living. Hence


the minister himself admits that we are going to have a decline in the economy, that instead of an increase or expansion in the economy we are going to get a reduced one and he puts that in his budget. When we read the budget we realize what is in store for us.


An hon. Member:: A Liberal budget.


George Clyde Nowlan: I could go on, Mr. Speaker, but I do not wish to trespass on the time of others. It is now five o'clock. Because of these and many other factors which I could bring forward I move, seconded by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefenbaker):
That all the words after "that" be deleted and the following substituted therefor:
This house regrets that the Minister of Finance by failing to maintain the constitutional practice of the essential secrecy of the budget has seriously weakened public confidence;
That in general his proposals will endanger and curtail the expansion of the economy;
That the imposition of a sales tax on certain building materials and machinery and apparatus to be used in manufacture or production is to be condemned as a retrograde and inexcusable action; and
That the proposals purporting to bring about desirable control by Canadians over the Canadian economy will fail by their very nature to achieve that objective and will result in deterioration of Canada's international relations.


Mr. Caron:: It being five o'clock, may I move the adjournment of the debate.


Mr. Speaker:: I regret to say that it is not necessary for the hon. member to rise in his place. It being five o'clock p.m. the house will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely notices of motions.



PUBLIC SERVICE


Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East) moved:: That, in order to promote the development of the highest degree of morale amongst federal civil servants through removal of obstacles to settlement of fundamental grievances and to enable official spokesmen to appear before a standing committee of the House of Commons, standing order 65 (1) be amended by adding a paragraph (o) to read as follows:
"(o) on civil service affairs, to consist of 35 members, 10 of whom shall constitute a quorum;"
He said: Mr. Speaker, the motion which I am sponsoring at this time is concise and, I think, is self-explanatory. I am not too much concerned about the details as to the constitution of the suggested committee, the numbers or the quorum. What I desire to speak on this afternoon has to do wholly and solely with the principles and the suggestion

that the standing order be amended so as to provide for a committee on civil service affairs. I can assure you, sir, that this motion was placed on the order paper only after a great deal of consideration and after consultation with a number of the executive officers of the civil service association and after having been invited to sit in on meetings of the rank and file members of the civil service.
This is the fifth parliament of Canada, Mr. Speaker, of which I have had the privilege of being a member. During every session of the five parliaments that I have been here I have heard the members of all parties speak in the highest possible terms of the federal civil service of Canada. Time after time, the members of all parties have spoken, and spoken truly, of the high quality of our civil service. Members have referred to the sincerity of civil servants, their integrity, their ability and their loyalty. I agree with all these expressions about our civil service. Unfortunately, however, it has been our experience that these are only words, only platitudes, only generalities, because no action has been taken over the years either by Liberal or Conservative governments to express approval of the civil service in the form of regulations or procedures whereby their fundamental grievances or problems could be tackled. I am convinced, sir, that the time is now long past when we should express our gratitude to those who have the responsibility for carrying out the laws that are adopted by the House of Commons. These people are the public relations officers of parliament itself in dealing with the people. We should express our appreciation by showing them that we want to assist them in resolving their problems and difficulties. By our policies and decisions, we should make it clear to the civil servants that everything possible is being done by the members of parliament who, you might say in the final analysis, are almost their employers. By doing these things, we would maintain the highest morale amongst the
300,000	or 400,000 civil servants who come within our jurisdiction.
I regret having to say, sir, that as a result of the many matters brought to my attention by civil servants, as a result of my attendance at meetings of the rank and file, particularly the lower echelons of the civil service, the esprit de corps, the morale of the civil service is perhaps at the lowest ebb in many years. It is at a low ebb because of the failure of the House of Commons in general, and governments in particular, to take action to resolve the difficulties of the civil service or to lay down policies that would give civil servants a clear insight as to how they could
19, 1963	.1357
Suggested Committee on Public Service handle negotiations, how they can get grievances settled, how they can achieve a basis of understanding as between employer and employee.
I want to admit, sir, that amongst the civil service associations in Canada on a federal basis there is not complete unanimity. However, I think I might say there is a desire amongst the memberships to be first class citizens, and not second class, as employees of this country. They desire collective bargaining, but admittedly there may be some differentiation between associations as to whether collective bargaining should mean the same rights as other organized workers in Canada or whether it should be similar to the negotiations policemen and firemen have, that is compulsory acceptance of an arbitration award.
However, sir, those are matters which could undoubtedly be resolved and, from my point of view, might perhaps be resolved if there could be a discussion between a committee of the House of Commons and the official spokesmen of the various associations within the federal civil service. I go beyond that basic principle of collective bargaining. I say that the time has now arrived when, because of the inaction of governments both now and in the past to deal with fundamental grievances in the interests of the efficiency of the public service, there should be a change in our standing orders to enable us to have a standing committee before whom the official spokesmen of the civil servants could appear and to whom they could present any fundamental grievances. Then the committee, in its wisdom, after consideration could make a recommendation to this House of Commons and through the House of Commons to those who have the responsibility for the final agreement with employees of the federal government.
Without any question, they have grievances. Undoubtedly, one of their grievances has to do with working conditions and pay. Those of us who have been here over the years, and who have been here especially during the past two years, cannot help but reach the conclusion that there has been a government policy to the effect that to those who have more shall be given, and to those who have not, moonlighting. No official statistics are available in Canada on any of the categories of workers in our country, but perhaps there is more moonlighting amongst civil servants than any other group. This is not because they desire it but because in the lower echelons, and this covers thousands upon thousands, it is the only way they can provide for themselves and their families the standard of living to which they are entitled in Canada. This requires moonlighting by the head of the family or requires the husband and wife both
1358	HOUSE OF
Suggested Committee on Public Service to work. I was amazed, sir, to find, and to find conclusively, that many of those who work eight hours a day for the federal government then work four to six hours a night as janitors in supermarkets or office blocks. This situation exists amongst civil servants not only because of the neglect of this parliament in general, but in particular because of the attitude of those responsible for wage policies as they apply to the civil service. As I said a moment ago, to those who have more shall be given, and to those who have not, that is the lower echelons, the lower pay categories, only faith and hope.
I would like to give just one example, although I could give many. It is not directly a civil service matter, but the principle is the same. Take the most recent increases to the armed forces. They became effective on October 1, 1962. An ordinary seaman in the navy, a private in the army and an aircraftsman second class in the air force got a $48 annual increase, but if you were a captain in the navy, a colonel in the army or a group captain in the air force you got a $1,080 annual increase. And that, Mr. Speaker, was supposedly based on a policy to take care of the increased cost of living.
When you see policies of that nature applied throughout the entire civil service it is no wonder there is a breakdown in esprit de corps and morale.
This house has become very concerned when it sees any possibility of industrial disruption because of long drawn out negotiations. Just now longshoremen in Vancouver have taken a strike vote, and I believe around 95 per cent of them voted to strike. Over 14 months of negotiations they could not reach a settlement, and now this will disrupt the waterfront industry in Vancouver. But what about the situation of our federal civil servants, many of whom have been taking part in negotiations for two years and there is still no decision? The most damnable feature of all is that it applies mainly to those who need an increase most. As members of parliament we are to be indicted if we allow certain situations to carry on.
Take the case of postal clerks and postal carriers. Postal clerks have to have some education and undergo examinations twice a year, and sometimes three or four on-spot examinations. They must know hundreds of thousands of post offices and how to direct mail by the fastest route, but yet we pay them less than the pay of a street cleaner. I am not deprecating the importance of street cleaners. They are vitally important to all of us, but take the case of the postal clerk and what he has to do. How can we justify paying him less than a street cleaner? Then take the position of postal carriers.


Take also the case of those who are employed in this building as sessional staff. Even today the Minister of Finance stated he is not in a position to state what is going to be done. There are many fundamental grievances of this nature.
I have been making a study of some of the regulations that apply to employees who come under the authority of some bureaucrats in various departments. I maintain that a few of these regulations are contrary to the bill of rights. They are definitely contrary to provincial legislation as regards holidays with pay, as regards monetary penalties on being late for work, and as regards using a car at the end of a postal carrier route to get down to a district post office in order to check out.
It is quite obvious no action has been taken to correct many of the fundamental grievances that exist. There is not any definite policy. Take the question of wages. All the executive officers of the various associations to whom I have spoken just do not know where they are at. A few years ago, by authority of this house, we established a special branch on job evaluation, on a basis of civil service salaries compared with those of outside workers. A report was brought in, but what happened to it? The civil service might be prepared to accept it, but when it reached the treasury board they did not like the basis of the orientation and they brought in their own, based on nothing. And so the civil servants do not know where they are. I believe that was the main reason for the meeting on June 14 between the Minister of Finance and the executive officers of the federal civil service association.
I am just trying to outline our views that for the maintenance of the esprit de corps and morale of the civil service we should amend our standing orders so that, through official spokesmen, fundamental grievances that could not be resolved in any other way could be placed before a committee of the House of Commons for its consideration. I believe this would give a lift to the administrators and those men and women in charge of the public relations of the government.
There is one other point of this suggestion. The appointment of such a committee would serve a very useful purpose in that hon. members of the house who have things brought to their attention that should be handled by civil servants themselves, but for varying reasons are not so handled, could bring these matters to the attention of the committee.
Take, for example, our own security staff right here in this house. How can they bring up basic problems themselves? It is pretty difficult. The majority of hon. members can

5et away over week ends, but we who come from the maritimes and British Columbia are in the House of Commons seven days a week. We see what goes on, and it is a disgrace that we have a security staff which I maintain is undermanned by at least 10 men.
These buildings are the property of the people of Canada. We want the public to come here, to see the buildings and learn all about them. They do come here in their thousands. Have you ever been in the house on a holiday, a Saturday or Sunday, Mr. Speaker? Some days there are 3,000, 4,000 and 5,000 visitors, but we have a security staff so undermanned that instead of explaining the buildings to groups of 35 or 50 I have seen them having to cope with groups of 100, 125 and 150. It is not right; it is not fair.
It is important to let the civil servants know that we mean what we say about their sincerity, integrity and loyalty, and by our decisions we must show we believe they should be among the first of the first class citizens of the country, and not second class citizens denied rights and opportunities that are open to others. That is why I moved this motion. I hope it will be carried; but even if it is not, I trust it will be an indication to the government now in office, to the people responsible for policies and negotiations, that we are vitally interested in our civil service and we are not going to rest content until they get a square and decent deal.


Mr. D. G. Hahn (Broadview):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is proposing that a standing committee of the house be set up to deal with problems and grievances relating to the civil service. When looking at any of these resolutions or proposals for legislation, I think we have to first of all ascertain whether there is a problem that needs to be solved. Second, we must decide whether this is the correct way to solve the problem we have uncovered. Let us look at this particular proposal in that light.
First of all, in talking about the civil service I am sure all of us would agree with the hon. member when he describes in the highest possible terms the quality, integrity and ability of our civil service. We all know that the civil service in this country has done and continues to do an outstanding job in carrying on the business of government. I think we must also realize that in addition to being a group of people of high quality, they are a very important group carrying out the business of government. From the straight point of view of dollars, looking at the estimates for this year we see that civil service salaries and wages amount to some $875 million. So we are not dealing with a small group of people who are easy to get together; we are
19, 1963	1359
Suggested Committee on Public Service dealing with a very large group of people. We are dealing not only with a very large group of people, but with a very large sum of money.
The civil service are important because they are in daily contact with the citizens of this country. Through their actions, ability and skill the public either have or lose confidence in the democratic process, in the government, because civil servants are the last outposts of government; they are the only contact that many of our people have with government. For this reason I think it is vital that the civil service be not only the best people we can attract, but that also in their dealings with the public at large they demonstrate that they are satisfied, well treated and happy in the service of the government.
The hon. member has suggested that our civil servants are second class citizens. I do not agree with him on that point. I believe they are first class citizens, but I also believe they have second class privileges. The hon. member discussed the problem of civil servants having to moonlight, not being able to earn enough in their jobs to support their families. I know this is a problem. I know people in the service of this government who are not able to maintain their families and have to seek outside jobs. This reflects on the efficiency with which they carry out our business, the business of the government. I know also that in the civil service there are grievances and that sometimes grievance procedures are cumbersome and difficult. I know it is difficult to get resolution to some of these problems. I know also that in bargaining for proper pay and salaries it has been a continuing complaint of the civil service that they have second class rights. The bargaining is difficult; it goes over a long, protracted period of time. They do not have the strength that outside employees have; they do not have the strength of pressing their demands to the ultimate through strike action. It is for this reason that something has to be done in this area. I agree wholeheartedly with those who support the idea that there should be proper collective bargaining for people in the civil service and that there should be compulsory arbitration in settling disputes that arise.
There are many, many problems for the civil servant, but I do not intend to outline them all. I am sure I cannot bring tears to the eyes of hon. members of the house, as the hon. member who preceded me may have done, in outlining these problems. I think it is sufficient to say that the civil service, as it is now constituted, has problems in getting first class rights that go with their position as first class citizens. There is a problem, and
1360	HOUSE OF
Suggested Committee on Public Service I think it is a problem that we must recognize. What, then, is the solution to this problem? There are many possible alternatives that can be adopted. We could have a royal commission and shelve the problem for a couple of years. We could set up, as was suggested by the hon. member, a standing committee which would deal with these problems from time to time, and not only from time to time but over a permanent period of time; in other words, as future problems arise a mechanism would be there to look at and deal with them. A third method would be to introduce little bits of legislation one at a time, here and there as we see problems arising. It would seem to me, Mr. Speaker, that of these three solutions the one with most merit is that suggested by the hon. member.
I think it would be a very, very sound idea to have a committee of this house on a permanent basis continually reviewing and listening to the problems of the employees, in effect, of this house, of the people who are carrying into practice the policies and legislation that originate in this chamber. I believe this might be considered to be a proper parliamentary responsibility, to carry out our legislation not only through the stage of printing the bills but to also make sure that the civil service do have a place where they can properly present and air their problems. I therefore commend the hon. member for bringing forward this resolution and wish to state that I support it.


Mr. Lloyd Francis (Carleton):: Mr. Speaker, I too would like to support this resolution. The dilemma confronting every private member at this time is whether to remain silent and refrain from making remarks, in an effort to accommodate the passage of a measure in the limited time available, or make remarks such as I should like to make at this point. I was for some nine years a civil servant; I had the honour of being a national president of one of the three largest staff associations of civil servants in Canada. I believe this resolution is a good one. There is a similar resolution, No. 65, in my name, which is designed to achieve substantially the same purpose as this resolution. There are some differences, notably in terms of the size of the committee and whether it should be a standing or special committee. I personally support the right to independent arbitration, which I think should be spelled out in specific, legislative terms.
As a member of this house I have on occasions had to listen to the type of intemperate attack which the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Woolliams) makes from time to time. I will forgo the pleasure of replying


to that hon. member at this time because I hope to be able to do so when he is in this house.
A new act came into effect in April, 1962 which was designed to do certain things for the civil service of Canada. As a member of this house I have received a large number of representations concerning inequities in the application and administration of this act. For example, a group of geologists engaged on an 18 months term prior to their getting Fh.D. degrees who did field work for a specified period were classified as temporary employees. That classification has been abandoned, but the effect is that this group of civil servants is deprived of substantial fringe benefits, which represents a severe cut in remuneration to them for no good reason.
I had an example brought to my attention the other day of a civil servant who got a promotion without an increase in pay. It was a reclassification. When the pay increases were announced they were made retroactive and the net result was that he got $210 a year less than he would have got if he had not been promoted, because of the way in which the salary increases were applied. The staff associations have carried these cases as far as they can within the machinery available, but then they get stumped. They meet a stone wall. I believe there has to be some type of machinery to permit an orderly examination of situations of this kind, and the establishment of a committee as envisaged in this resolution is a step which I can wholeheartedly support.
In the United Kingdom there is machinery for dealing with situations such as this. It has evolved over the years and it is usually termed the Whitley council. I have read the reports in Hansard of previous parliaments. Representatives of the party sitting opposite in the house-not of the group putting forward this motion-spoke on many occasions to say they were in favour of a Whitley council, but they did nothing to bring such a council into being. I think the time has come when we should proceed to a more developed stage of dealing with employees of the government of Canada and crown corporations by offering them machinery for more advanced collective bargaining, including the right to independent arbitration. To make this work we have to determine the proper bargaining agents and units, and this is not easy.
The association I represented includes various professional categories in all areas of government service. Other types of organization take everyone in a department and cut across professional lines. In some cases the bargaining units will have to reflect the patterns in which civil servants have, in fact,

been organized. This will call for elaborate examination in one case after another. I think it would be an appropriate task for a committee of the kind suggested to sort out the kind of rules which would be appropriate to Canadian civil servants. We cannot follow blindly the experience of the United Kingdom or of other nations, because we have evolved here a fine civil service with its own traditions of staff organization, posing some unique problems.
The committee should set itself the task of examining the inequities which exist under a new act which created a number of difficult situations, and it should attempt to provide an orderly channel for the review and correction of the regulations under the present act. Orderly amendments could be prepared which would spell out the means by which proper units could be established, and representation could be determined by those units. This would be the basis of independent arbitration procedure. I am confident this will meet with the support of all staff associations representing major groups of civil servants in Canada.
I think it would be a fine thing, if at all possible, for hon. members to give serious consideration to the establishment of a committee to deal with these matters. I cannot see any other way of dealing with them unless we can arrive at a broad measure of non-partisan agreement in terms of the objectives we hope to secure. We have taken great steps forward on the industrial front in the development of collective bargaining procedures. We have made progress, also, in dealing with employees of the crown. But here we have lagged behind, and private industry has led the way. Legislation has been more appropriate in the case of private industry and there has been a reluctance, traditional in many respects, to deal with this matter by legislative authority. I think, also, there has been a certain amount of timidity on the part of staff associations and the civil service itself.
We have a fine civil service in Canada, one of the best in any modern country in the industrialized world. We have some of the most dedicated men and women serving Canada in circumstances in which, sometimes, they take abuse in silence; they serve because they believe in what they are doing. They are truly Canadians and they are proud of that fact. They are in no way second class persons. Some of the ablest men and women it has been my pleasure to meet are in the public service of Canada today, and in many cases they remain in this employment at considerable personal and financial sacrifice. I think we are under a real obligation to take
Suggested Committee on Public Service steps to see that we do better than we are doing now to bring about a situation in which the rights of civil servants are much more in line than they are at present with those enjoyed in private industry.
(Translation):


Yvon Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I
am pleased to take part in this debate, because as parliamentary secretary to the Secretary of State I am interested in the welfare of the civil servants. I therefore commend the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) for having put this motion on the order paper.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to make the house realize the civil servants have not always had the opportunity of stating their grievances. I read very carefully the proposal to have the house form a permanent committee which might meet the spokesmen of the civil service commission and study the civil servants' grievances.
I listened with great interest to the mover of the resolution; he submitted grievances which really deserve consideration. Moreover, I think that we should examine the lot of federal civil servants who are not getting a reasonable salary on which to support their families as they should.
I know also, that several grievances have been vented in various divisions but were never submitted to the responsible authorities.
As a matter of fact, civil servants are, in some cases, afraid to complain about certain conditions or to express their dissatisfaction in a certain matter, because they fear reprisals or loss of advancement within their branch if their denouncing of certain conditions ever were known.
Mr. Speaker, since my appointment to the secretary of state department, I have had the privilege to receive, from several hon. members, complaints made to them by civil servants, and I must say that, after having studied some files, I found that several of those complaints were justified. I discovered an attitude which, under certain circumstances, indicated certain trends that should be studied seriously, and more particularly with regard to competition notices for civil service positions.
As a matter of fact, I received representations to the effect that some notices of competition seemed to have been prepared to measure. I also noticed that this did not take
1362	HOUSE OF
Suggested Committee on Public Service place with the coming into power of the new government but seemed to have been going on for some years. One gets the impression that in the case of some vacancies, the qualifications required are so well spelled out that it is a foregone conclusion that Mr. So and So will be appointed.
Mr. Speaker, I am not afraid to tell the house that this situation was brought to my attention on several occasions, first of all by civil servants in my riding and then by hon. members or civil servants from other regions. In brief, I think that a serious survey of the situation should be made in order to see how things are done in the civil service administration, because we must see to it that the government employees have better safeguards than at the present time.
Also, the matter of bilingualism raises some difficulties in the province of Quebec. For instance, federal civil servants of good faith go to various regions in the province of Quebec to put French speaking candidates through oral exams. But those so-called bilingual civil servants do not always know the full significance of French words or do not always know the meaning of French phrases which would allow them to exert a fair judgment in such competitions. I think that is another reason why we should study very carefully what is going on and try to improve the situation.
Mr. Speaker, I see that the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon) seems anxious to ask me a question.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, would the hon. member allow me a question?


Yvon Dupuis: Certainly.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Does the parliamentary secretary think that the government intends to put forward this year an amendment to the Civil Service Act in order to allow federal government employees to take advantage of arbitration procedures, as it has been requested?


Yvon Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, for the information of the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm, I can assure him that under a Liberal regime government members will call upon the government to take the matter under serious consideration. I could add that my hon. friend has missed fine opportunities of doing so when his party was in power and I am glad to see that he rises more often now that he is in the opposition.


Mr. Speaker, we will certainly look into the situation of federal civil servants. In fact, I was just saying that since my appointment as parliamentary secretary, I noticed gaps that we will try to fill, because, when they are faced with problems, Liberals do not try to bury their heads in the sand like ostriches or like the Conservatives did when they were in power.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: You neglected them for 22 years.


Yvon Dupuis: 
Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I support without reservation the motion presented by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch). Besides I have had many opportunities to praise and congratulate the civil servants in the house.
It is true that many improvements could be made in the civil service. We agree that the civil service is not perfect-the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville (Mr. Dupuis) said so himself.
We would like to see the recommendations of the Glassco commission implemented as soon as possible. It would be unfortunate to undertake a study that would last five, six or seven years. The facts are there and are well known. Besides, if the recommendations-


Cyril Lloyd Francis: Is the hon. member making a speech?


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: If the hon. member wants to ask me a question, I will be pleased to answer if I can.
To go on with my remarks, Mr. Speaker, the report of the Glassco commission contains interesting suggestions. That commission made inquiries into every federal department, including crown corporations.
I think that the trouble lies mainly with the crown corporations which have an important job to do. The Civil Service Act should be improved. The members are not even aware of what goes on in the crown corporations. When we ask a question in the house, that is to the ministers who are responsible
Suggested Committee on Public Service for those corporations, they answer: I am only responsible for the money spent by the crown corporations. It is a known fact that the members, representatives of the people, know absolutely nothing about the duties of so and so who works for a crown corporation. Whether it be Canadian Arsenals-


Yvon Dupuis: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
I do not think that this motion has anything to do with crown corporations. It deals with the civil service and the advisability of setting up a standing committee to hear the complaints of the civil servants. It does not mention the crown corporations at all and the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon) must know it as well as the other members in this chamber.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, even if there is no mention made of the crown corporations, I am of the opinion that the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) intended to include them also.


Yvon Dupuis: I feel, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Mont-calm has no right to impute intentions to the hon. member for Vancouver East and he is intelligent enough to know that there is no mention made of crown corporations in the motion under study.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I have the right to make suggestions but I think that the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville has no right to take over the prerogatives of the Speaker.


Yvon Dupuis: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not permit the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm to pretend that I take over the prerogatives of the Speaker. However, I draw the attention of the Speaker to the remarks of the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm and I would ask him to call the member to order.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I do not recall that the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville was addressing you; he was addressing your humble servant, the member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm.


Yvon Dupuis: The word "humble" is superfluous.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I thank you for your complimentary remark.


Mr. Remi Paul (Berihier-Maskinonge-De-lanaudiere):: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I think that the word "competent" should be added to the word "humble".
1364	HOUSE OF
Suggested Committee on Public Service


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for Berthier-Maskinonge-Delanaudiere (Mr. Paul).
Coming back to the subject under discussion, I sincerely believe that the hon. member for Vancouver East intended also to include the crown corporations, which also employ Canadian people. The crown corporations' employees are also denied certain rights-


Yvon Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I would like to have your ruling-
(Text):


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Order.


Yvon Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I should like you to tell the house whether the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm is in order.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Up to this point I think the hon. member who now has floor has been referring to the resolution before the house. However, if he wishes to suggest that it should be extended to some other body, I think he has a right to do so.
(Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I wish to thank you, Mr. Speaker.
(Text):


Yvon Dupuis: I will not appeal your ruling. (Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I have never questioned your ability, Mr. Speaker. I would rather question that of the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville.
(Text):


Yvon Dupuis: I said I would not appeal Mr. Speaker's decision.
(Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: And, I would hate to see the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napier-ville question your ability. On this side of the house we are convinced of your integrity and of your keen sense of responsibility. We know that your decisions are in the best interests of hon. members.
Coming back to the motion of the hon. member for Vancouver East, if there is any uneasiness at all, it is most likely to be felt among the employees of crown corporations. It seems to me that the hon. member would be well advised to submit this measure some other year, for I fear that the present government members are neither men enough nor conscious enough of their responsibilities


to accept without more ado this motion, which would allow civil servants, to whom at present the right of appeal is denied, to obtain redress of their grievances.
I ask the government to awaken to its responsibilities. I ask the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville, who is a parliamentary secretary, to see to it that in the few minutes left, his colleagues do not kill this resolution which defends the rights of the civil servants. I wish to point out that not only is the motion of the hon. member for Vancouver East excellent in itself, but that it also is in the best interest of the public service and of all Canadians. In fact, this motion should be adopted forthwith.


Yvon Dupuis: Why have you not done so yourself?


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville has asked me a question. The answer is that when we were in power we had a comprehensive program, but we were defeated through the concerted efforts of Liberals and Social Crediters.
(Text):


Mr. Gerald A. Regan (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, I just wish to take a brief moment in which to say I wholeheartedly support the principle of this motion and also to compliment the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) on the manner in which it is drafted. The only thing I should like to add is this. I feel that prevailing rate employees, so-called, should also be included in this matter. Civil servants certainly need a better and more effective grievance procedure. One would hope that when this government introduces a system of collective bargaining with arbitration procedure soon, it is my great hope-


An hon. Member:: Be careful.


Gerald Augustine Regan: I am being careful. It is my great hope that at that time it would also include in the arbitration procedure a very effective grievance procedure. That step would take care of this problem. Something is necessary in order to give to civil servants the opportunity to have their grievances effectively dealt with. Again I would urge that in this resolution the question of prevailing rate employees should also have been considered.


Some hon. Members:: Question.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: Mr. Speaker, it is very pleasing to note-


Stanley Howard Knowles: A friend of the civil service.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: -that the hon. member for li'Assomption-Montcalm-


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: I stand corrected. I am glad the hon. member has brought that omission to my attention. I am pleased to note that he has again recovered his voice. We sat for several months in which we felt that he just roosted rather than spoke, and we are very pleased to note this recovery of his voice.
My purpose in rising is-


Stanley Howard Knowles: To talk the motion out.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: -to support this motion, inasmuch as it is a worthy resolution. I wish to draw the attention of the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) to the fact that we have an industrial relations committee of this house. It is a standing committee set up under standing order 65. This committee provides a forum for discussions dealing with industrial relations, labour relations and so on. I have been a member of that committee, with but a short recess, since 1949.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Two minutes to go.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: I am pleased to note that the hon. member has recovered the use of his arms as well as his voice.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.	.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: Having been a member of this committee-
19, 1963	1365
Suggested Committee on Public Service


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker.
(Translation):
The hon. member is going to kill an excellent motion.
(Text):


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: I regret that I did not have the benefit of the facility for simultaneous translation and therefore I did not understand the words-


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I mentioned that you will kill this motion and that is all.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: -so well spoken by my hon. friend. Hence I do not know what his question of privilege was if, in fact, he had one. This I doubt, having in mind the actions of the hon. member in the past.
I was about to say-


An hon. Member:: Six o'clock.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: -that I have been a member of the industrial relations committee since 1949 with but a short recess. In those years, however, we sat very few times, perhaps once or twice a session. Sometimes we went through a complete session without having sat at all. Would it not be possible to incorporate what the hon. member's intention is into this resolution?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Order. It being six o'clock I must advise the house that the hour for consideration of private members' business has expired.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The end of the 59th day.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.

[Stage Direction]
MONTREAL STOCK EXCHANGE 453 St. Francois Xavier street Montreal 1, P.Q.
Office of the President
June 18, 1963.
The Honourable Walter L. Gordon, F.C.A., Minister of Finance,
Parliament Buildings,
Ottawa, Ontario.
Dear Mr. Minister:
The financial capitals of the world have just about had enough from Canada. Last Friday, the initial reaction to the budget was one of bewilderment and dismay. Yesterday, it was anger and scorn. Today, our friends in the western world fully realize that we don't want them or their money and that Canadians who deal with them in even modest amounts will suffer a 30 per cent expropriation of the assets involved. And their reaction? If that is what Canadians want, let them have it.
May I offer a few general comments.
1.	The entire series of measures aimed at discouraging non-resident investment is based on a serious error. In the budget address you stated:
"As I indicated earlier, it is the policy of this government to encourage direct foreign investment in new enterprises in this country on the basis of partnership with Canadian residents. While this type of investment is of great value to Canada, it is our view that non-resident "take-overs" of established Canadian companies rarely confer any benefit on the Canadian economy."
This is complete and utter nonsense. A non-resident take-over confers great benefits on the Canadian economy. We may not like it but that is not the point. The new owners bring the advantages of new technology, new research and development, new products and ideas which can immensely benefit the Canadian consumer and which will be denied him otherwise. The former owners receive funds which become available for investment in new Canadian enterprises or in government undertakings which contribute to the expansion of our economy. Even if they invest the funds abroad, we reduce the balance of our international indebtedness and the income in dividends and interest from such investment
improves our balance of payments by reducing the net outflow on current account All this is elementary.
2.	Underlying this series of measures is a misconception about the part played by shareholders. I quote:
"I suggest that a 25 per cent equity interest is in most cases appropriate to ensure that a Canadian point of view is always available when company policy decisions are arrived at. A smaller percentage would probably not be sufficient for this purpose. A larger percentage would be neither necessary nor in many cases practicable".
Presumably, you are counting on the Canadian shareholder demanding a larger raw material content, a certified list of fees and expenses paid to management, detailed statements of the subsidiary's export efforts, prices of intercompany transfers of materials and components, etc. A not very proud role is assigned to the Canadian shareholder. His contribution will be to badger, to harass and to torment management and the 75 per cent controlling interest. How futile and how unrealistic. Today, the shareholder does not care that much. If he does not like a company or its management, he sells his stock and quietly goes his way. A greater Canadian voice in the direction of subsidiaries will not be obtained in this manner. The success (?) of the budget depends on Canadian shareholders imposing their will on the majority interest, which cannot be done.
Canadians have been given the opportunity many times in the past to purchase shares in Canadian subsidiaries but the record has not been a happy one as the attached table, which the Montreal stock exchange filed with the royal commission on banking and finance, shows. If subsidiaries do make 25 per cent available and Canadian shareholders do not respond, are we going to solve the unhappy dilemma by forced payroll deductions?
3.	The burden of the 30 per cent capital levy falls, naturally enough, on those who have saved, have invested and have so managed their affairs that they possess property and investments of a reasonable size. It falls on listed corporations by virtue of the amendment to the Excise Tax Act and it falls on unlisted, privately held and family owned enterprises by virtue of the following paragraph from the budget address:
"It will be noted that this measure applies only to the shares of listed public companies

Measures are under consideration, and may be discussed with the provinces at an appropriate time, which will apply to all Canadian companies including private companies. I trust that no flood of sales of established Canadian concerns to non-residents will develop in an attempt to anticipate the further measures to which I have referred, in light of the declared view of the government that such sales are generally undesirable."
In effect, a family or individual, forced to sell a private enterprise to provide liquidity to meet estate taxes and succession duties, cannot sell in the best market if that market happens to be non-resident. In many instances, there may be no offer from Canadians or an offer far below a non-resident offer. The owner has to compare a nonresident offer minus the 30 per cent confiscation demanded by Ottawa with the best domestic bid. A family, unable to obtain a satisfactory offer from Canadians and reluctant to accept a non-resident offer with the attendant 30 per cent Federal confiscation, may, in the end, lose everything if an untimely death forces the liquidaton of their enterprise. There are interesting implications here.
Skipping the semantics, we can see that the securities sales tax is not fundamentally a sales or excise tax,-it is a tax on wealth, a capital levy. It is far worse than 30 per cent capital gains tax because a capital gains tax falls on an increase in wealth between two points in time,-between the value of the asset at time of purchase and the value at time of sale. This new tax simply expropriates 30 per cent of the asset at the moment of transfer. It is not a sufficient defense to say that the tax applies only in the special circumstances of sales of assets to non-residents. It exists and the levy can be extended in its application at the will of the federal authority.
Second, if the government is not concerned here with revenue (the unbelievable rate is evidence of this), the purpose of the budget must be to destroy (prevent) certain activities engaged in by its citizens. In other words, the government is using the power to tax really to prohibit the sale, by Canadians of assets for money to citizens of the United States, United Kingdom, France or other friendly powers. I am not a lawyer but it seems to me that legislation of this nature respecting property and civil rights comes under provincial jurisdiction and is beyond the competence of the federal government.
Premier Lesage, Rene Levesque, Paul Gerin-Lajoie and other members of the Quebec cabinet have repeatedly referred to the gradual erosion of the autonomy of the provinces. The creation of the new securities
sales tax, without prior discussion with the provinces would be difficult to justify at any time; it is unthinkable in the present atmosphere of strain and suspicion. It is a perfect example of the manner in which a new tax 'gimmick' can reduce existing sources of provincial revenue or invade a sphere of provincial authority, namely property and civil rights.
The forcing of increased Canadian ownership by the use of federal taxing powers creates two distinct sets of problems,-(a) the effect on existing subsidiaries and (b) the capital levy on future share transactions.
(a) By doubling the withholding tax on dividend payments and by refusing certain tax concessions to companies with less than 25 per cent Canadian ownership, the government is in effect describing 'good' and 'bad' subsidiaries. This raises certain questions in the applied art of discrimination.
1.	Are Dupont and C.I.L. 'bad' Canadian companies? Less than 20 per cent of their stock is in the hands of the public.
2.	If they raise public participation to 25 per cent, will they become 'good' Canadian companies and qualify for reduced taxation?
3.	If Canadians hold 25 per cent of the shares of these companies one month and then reduce their holdings by 5 per cent to buy bonds, do these companies become 'bad' companies through circumstances beyond their control?
4.	Abitibi and many other Canadian corporations, operate wholly owned subsidiaries abroad. Will foreign retaliatory legislation force these companies to spin off ownership?
5.	Does the government intend to offer 25 per cent ownership in the subsidiary of Polymer Corp. to citizens of France? Holland?
6.	Does the government expect further direct investment (which it approves, see page 18) to be encouraged to come into Canada by these dipsy-doodling and discriminatory methods of taxing profits and repatriated dividends?
7.	Does the government not expect other nations to retaliate?
8.	Will these discriminatory measures improve Quebec's chances of attracting capital from Europe?
9.	Will we not, in the final analysis, find our capital in the Ottawa printing presses rather than the capital markets of the world?
10.	etc., etc.,
b. The 30 per cent capital levy is designed to discourage take-overs but makes no distinction between ordinary portfolio investments in the country and actual take-overs.
[Stage Direction]
As a result:-
1.	The liquidity, depth and breadth of our security markets will decrease sharply and we can look for a decline in the market value of Canadian securities. The Canadian investor will be the first casualty of the proposed legislation.
2.	Supply and demand forces on Canadian markets become distorted. Foreign buying will be discouraged and Canadian owners of securities will face a 30 per cent confiscation if they offer shares to a value of more than $50,000 in one day. This is not a large amount.
3.	The tax will create two markets and two prices for Canadian securities-one in Canada where the tax is applicable and liquidity reduced and the other in New York where transactions can take place among nonresidents free of tax. Thus the New York and London exchanges will grow at the expense of the Canadian exchanges.
4.	Arbitrage houses, which operate between Canada, the United States and Europe and bring great depth to the market, will disappear. They cannot operate on one side of the market only.
5.	Hundreds of millions of dollars of Canadian shares held abroad overhang the Canadian market. The Canadian exchanges will now provide restricted and discriminatory markets for these investors. The liquidation of even a small portion of these holdings would be disastrous to the Canadian equity owner.
6.	The budget measures will encourage Canadians to invest in American securities where the markets are free and non-discriminatory. Exchange controls are clearly the next step.
7.	Funds, trust companies etc. will hesitate to buy Canadian equities because the markets in which they deal will be reduced and restricted.
8.	etc., etc., etc.,
We will not lay the foundations of a greater Canada on a budget such as this. Since the days of the Marshall plan, the nations of the west have been working toward a greater economic and political unity. This budget will turn back the clock as we Canadians shut ourselves up in our own tight little corner.
Foreign ownership is a problem in Canada. You are quite right in this but this investment is not financed by foreign governments or inspired by desires to impair our political sovereignty. It is financed by the savings and investments of friends in other nations and is successful because of the initiative and enterprise that accompanies and manages their capital. The antidote lies in our own private sector as we strive to accumulate the savings to invest on our own account and to find within ourselves a similar energy and imagination. This is a long and hard road but we must remember that we have sought, relied on and lived with foreign capital for generations and cannot now suddenly take an axe to murder the record of trust and confidence that has grown up over the years.
Some day, a political leader will rise up in Canada and say to the Canadian people that the solution to the problem of non-resident ownership does not lie in the vote getting arena at all; only then will Canadians have found true leadership and only then will our friends abroad breathe more easily and be happy for us.
Sincerely,

[Stage Direction]
President.

[Stage Direction]
ANALYSIS OF MONTREAL AND CANADIAN STOCK EXCHANGE SURVEY RESULTS Shareownerehip transition following underwriting in Canada of shares issued by Canadian subsidiaries of foreign corporations
(shareholdings in thousands)
[Stage Direction]
Com- pany Code Num- ber
[Stage Direction]
Year First Underwritten or First Date of Class Record of Share
[Stage Direction]
Shares Acquired by Canadians
[Stage Direction]
Shares Acquired U.S.A.
[Stage Direction]
in
[Stage Direction]
Shares Acquired in U.K.
[Stage Direction]
Shares Acquired in Other Countries
[Stage Direction]
Fina Tabu- lation Year
[Stage Direction]
Shares Owned in Canada
[Stage Direction]
Shares Owned in U.S.A.
[Stage Direction]
Shares Owned in U.K.
[Stage Direction]
Shares Owned in Other Countries
[Stage Direction]
Change in Percentage of Canadian Holdings
[Stage Direction]
Remarks
[Stage Direction]
No.
[Stage Direction]
%
[Stage Direction]
No. %
[Stage Direction]
No. %
[Stage Direction]
No.
[Stage Direction]
%
[Stage Direction]
No.
[Stage Direction]
%
[Stage Direction]
No. %
[Stage Direction]
No.
[Stage Direction]
%
[Stage Direction]
No.
[Stage Direction]
%
[Stage Direction]
Increase Decrease
[Stage Direction]
2000
[Stage Direction]
1952
[Stage Direction]
Common
[Stage Direction]
920
[Stage Direction]
92.0
[Stage Direction]
80
[Stage Direction]
8.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
731
[Stage Direction]
73.1
[Stage Direction]
217
[Stage Direction]
21.7
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
52
[Stage Direction]
5.2
[Stage Direction]
-18.9
[Stage Direction]
2001
[Stage Direction]
1955
[Stage Direction]
Pfd.
[Stage Direction]
96
[Stage Direction]
99.4
[Stage Direction]
.4
[Stage Direction]
0.6
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
1961
[Stage Direction]
80
[Stage Direction]
99.0
[Stage Direction]
.5
[Stage Direction]
0.6
[Stage Direction]
.2
[Stage Direction]
0.2
[Stage Direction]
.1
[Stage Direction]
.2
[Stage Direction]
- 0.4
[Stage Direction]
Partial redemption
[Stage Direction]
2002
[Stage Direction]
1959
[Stage Direction]
Common
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
65.0
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
22.0
[Stage Direction]
N/S 13.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
35.0
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
7.0
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
58.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-30.0
[Stage Direction]
For. acquisition
[Stage Direction]
2003
[Stage Direction]
1956
[Stage Direction]
Pfd.
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
100
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
100
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
NIL
[Stage Direction]
No trend
[Stage Direction]
2004
[Stage Direction]
1960
[Stage Direction]
Class B
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
100
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
100
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
NIL
[Stage Direction]
One family control
[Stage Direction]
2005
[Stage Direction]
1961
[Stage Direction]
Common
[Stage Direction]
625
[Stage Direction]
96.2
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
25 3.8
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
546
[Stage Direction]
83.9
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
104
[Stage Direction]
16.1
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-12.3
[Stage Direction]
50% owned in U.K
[Stage Direction]
2006
[Stage Direction]
1952
[Stage Direction]
Common
[Stage Direction]
5,624
[Stage Direction]
19.2
[Stage Direction]
23,090
[Stage Direction]
79.1
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
468
[Stage Direction]
1.7
[Stage Direction]
1961
[Stage Direction]
7,112
[Stage Direction]
22.5
[Stage Direction]
23,702
[Stage Direction]
75.0
[Stage Direction]
783
[Stage Direction]
2.5
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
3.3
[Stage Direction]
Interim offerings
[Stage Direction]
2007
[Stage Direction]
1955
[Stage Direction]
Class A
[Stage Direction]
487
[Stage Direction]
94.6
[Stage Direction]
26
[Stage Direction]
5.4
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
82
[Stage Direction]
16.8
[Stage Direction]
405
[Stage Direction]
83.2
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-77.8
[Stage Direction]
Partial retirement
[Stage Direction]
2008
[Stage Direction]
1956
[Stage Direction]
Common
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
NIL
[Stage Direction]
No trend
[Stage Direction]
2009
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
Common
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
NIL
[Stage Direction]
No trend
[Stage Direction]
2010
[Stage Direction]
1960
[Stage Direction]
Common
[Stage Direction]
1,416
[Stage Direction]
40.6
[Stage Direction]
1,919
[Stage Direction]
55.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
151
[Stage Direction]
4.4
[Stage Direction]
1961
[Stage Direction]
1,704
[Stage Direction]
45.4
[Stage Direction]
1,917
[Stage Direction]
51.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
136
[Stage Direction]
3.6
[Stage Direction]
4.8
[Stage Direction]
2011
[Stage Direction]
1955
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
No trend
[Stage Direction]
2012
[Stage Direction]
1952
[Stage Direction]
Common
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
40.2
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
59.8
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
12.5
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
87.5
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-27.7
[Stage Direction]
2013
[Stage Direction]
1960
[Stage Direction]
Common
[Stage Direction]
47
[Stage Direction]
93.2
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
6.8
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
48
[Stage Direction]
95.2
[Stage Direction]
2
[Stage Direction]
4.8
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
2.0
[Stage Direction]
2014
[Stage Direction]
1956
[Stage Direction]
Ffd.
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
15.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
85.0
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
7.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
93.0
[Stage Direction]
- 8.0
[Stage Direction]
2015
[Stage Direction]
1956
[Stage Direction]
Pfd.
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
67.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
33.0
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
44.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
56.0
[Stage Direction]
-23.0
[Stage Direction]
2016
[Stage Direction]
1959
[Stage Direction]
Pfd.
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
52.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
48.0
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
23.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
77.0
[Stage Direction]
-29.0
[Stage Direction]
2017
[Stage Direction]
1958
[Stage Direction]
Pfd.
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
61.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
39.0
[Stage Direction]
1962
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
31.0
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
-
[Stage Direction]
N/S
[Stage Direction]
69.0
[Stage Direction]
-30.0
[Stage Direction]
Percentages represent percentages of outstanding original issue.
N/S-Not stated by company surveyed.
Survey made of all listed corporations known to be controlled abroad.
[Stage Direction]

Thursday, June 20, 1963