1963-12-11

Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Secretary of Slate):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether 1 might just say a word about the business of the house for today. I believe, from what I have learned through the usual channels, that it would be agreeable to the house to continue the sitting today until seven o'clock, on the strict understanding that we would adjourn at seven o'clock and would not go beyond that time. If that is the understanding, I hope it can be so ordered.


Mr. Speaker:: The house has heard the suggestion of the Secretary of State. Is it so ordered?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



MINES, FORESTS AND WATERS CONCURRENCE IN SECOND REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE

Mr. O. J. Godin (Nickel Belt) moved: that the second report of the standing committee on mines, forests and waters presented to the house on Monday, December 9, be concurred in.


Mr. Erik Nielsen (Yukon):: Mr. Speaker, on Monday when the report was presented the Clerk did not read the report aloud. I do not believe any objection was raised at that time, but before the house votes on the matter I think we should know what we are voting on.


Mr. Speaker:: I am advised that notice has already been given, and certainly the report will be found in Votes and Proceedings of Monday, December 9, which I have before me. If any hon. member wishes details I can give them very quickly. Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the said motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

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

Mr. Orlikow: 1. How many positions covered by the civil service, government commissions and boards, such
28902-5-362
as the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the national film board, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, national research council. Atomic Energy of Canada, etc., require security screening?
2.	What are these positions, and in what departments?
3.	What are the criteria used to decide whether any position in a given department or commission will require security screening?
4.	What department or interdepartmental committee makes these decisions, and who are the members of such committee?


Mr. Pearson:: 1 and 3. No total has been made of the number of positions in the public service in relation to which security screening is required. The determination as to whether the incumbent of a position requires to be screened for security is based quite simply on whether or not the duties of the position require him to have access to classified information. In certain departments and agencies, all or almost all positions require such access; in other departments or agencies, relatively few. The number of such positions may vary considerably from time to time.
2.	It would be contrary to the public interest to identify specific positions within any department in relation to which security screening is required.
4. A decision as to whether or not the incumbent of a position requires to be screened for security is dictated by the nature of the work, and is the responsibility of each department or agency rather than that of any departmental or interdepartmental committee.


DEPARTMENTAL SECURITY OFFICERS
Mr. Orlikow: 1.	Who are the security officers in each department of the government?
2.	How long has each been on this job?
3.	What are the qualifications of each of the security officers?
4.	What training does each departmental security officer get for this particular job, and by whom are they trained?
5.	What are the instructions given to each departmental security officer for carrying out his work?
6.	From whom do they get these regulations?
7.	Who is responsible for drafting these regulations?
8.	How many persons applying for jobs or promotions in each department have been refused such jobs or promotions because they failed to get a security clearance, and of what total number of cases?
9.	What is the relationship between the departmental security officer and the civil service commission?
10.	What is the relationship between the departmental security officer and the R.C.M.P.?
11.	To whom do the departmental security officers report in each department?

Questions
12.	Do the departmental security officers make final decisions on cases or do they only make recommendations and, if the latter, who makes the final decisions?
13.	When they make adverse decisions, do the departmental security officers advise the civil service commission of the decision and the reasons for the decision?


Lester Bowles Pearson: 1 and 2. It would be contrary to the public interest to identify the security officers in each department or agency of the government.
3.	The qualifications of departmental or agency security officers vary with the security requirements of each department or agency. Security officers are required to be middle to senior rank officers of integrity and good judgment, with considerable experience in the field of personnel administration.
4.	The nature and degree of training which a security officer receives varies in accordance with the nature and extent of the security problems with which his department or agency is faced. In departments with the greatest security responsibilities, training is achieved through lectures, seminars, demonstrations, films, and the study of extensive background material. In addition, conferences of all departmental and agency security officers are held from time to time to instruct these officers in matters relating to personnel and physical security, and to give them an opportunity to discuss mutual problems in this field.
5.	6 and 7. Basic policy and instructions relating to security are given to departments and agencies by the government in order to ensure that minimum standards are maintained. On the basis of these instructions each department and agency is responsible for preparing detailed security regulations intended to meet its own particular security requirements. In addition to these instructions, departments and agencies are provided from time to time with a number of memoranda of guidance and advice prepared by the security panel resulting from its studies of specific matters relating to security.
8. It has been the policy of successive governments of Canada, and it is the policy of the present government not to reveal statistics concerning the numbers of persons in whose cases departmental action has been taken on security grounds.
9 and 10. Departmental and agency security officers consult regularly with appropriate officers of the civil service commission and of the security and intelligence directorate of the R.C.M. Police on matters relating to security in which they have mutual interests and responsibilities.
11. In the majority of departments and agencies, the security officer reports directly

to the deputy minister or head of agency. In all departments and agencies, however, the security officer is finally responsible to the deputy minister or head of agency.
12 and 13. In the straightforward granting of a security clearance, a final decision can be made by the security officer in accordance with security regulations. In cases in which there is some element of doubt the security officer would make appropriate recommendations to the deputy minister or head of agency. Should his recommendation result in a decision to dismiss, that decision would be taken by the minister responsible, or by such other person or body so authorized by statute. When such adverse recommendations or decisions are made, and they are relevant to the statutory functions of the civil service commission, the commission is, of course, advised.
NUCLEAR WEAPON STORAGE, VAL d'OR, QUE.


Mr. Caoueiie: 1.	What preparations are being made at Val d'Or, in the county of Villeneuve, for storage of nuclear weapons?
2.	Did the government consult the local authorities at Val d'Or before undertaking these preparations?
3.	How many additional workers will be employed as a result of these preparations?

Answer: 1. It is intended to build storage facilities for special weapons and to add to the air warning installations and to the sheds.
2.	No. However, the mayor of Val d'Or has ensured the government of his city's full co-operation.
3.	Since it is the contractor who will decide how many men will be employed, it is not yet known how many people will be employed.


WAR MEMORIAL, NEPEAN POINT, OTTAWA
Mr. Maiheson: 1.	What was envisaged in the Nepean point project, with whom did the plan originate, and what preparatory work thereon has been done to date?
2.	Who presently opposes this project and for what reason?
Answer: 1. The primary purpose of the Nepean point project was the provision of a suitable repository for the books of remembrance commemorating those Canadians who gave their lives in the Nile expedition and the South African war, world war II and the Korean campaign. The need for such a repository became apparent in 1954, as the world war II book was nearing completion, and cabinet authorized the then minister of veterans affairs, Hon. Hugues Lapointe, to appoint an advisory committee to study this matter and make recommendations.

The committee worked on the premise that the world war II book should have a permanent resting place comparable in artistic development, dignity and general atmosphere to the memorial chamber in the peace tower, which is the permanent repository of the world war I book of remembrance.
After studying existing and proposed government buildings, the committee concluded that a suitable chamber could not be constructed in any of them and it recommended the erection of a shrine of remembrance for this purpose on Nepean point.
In 1956 the minister announced in the house that the recommendation of the committee had been accepted by the government, and that the minister of public works had been instructed to proceed with the design of an appropriate building. Consultants were appointed and produced a number of preliminary designs. The selected design, along with a model, was submitted to the advisory committee on design of the national capital commission who requested a revision to reduce the size of the building and the government directed that the total cost must be lower. The consultants later produced such a revision. Preliminary drawings and elevations and a revised model of the project have been prepared but have not been submitted to the national capital commission.
Subsequent governments confirmed the original decision to construct a shrine and in February, 1963 it was announced that a design had been approved in principle. In September the Prime Minister confirmed that this government had decided to proceed with the project. Some controversy, however, had been developing on the need or the desirability of proceeding with the planning and in October the Minister of Veterans Affairs announced that action would be deferred until a careful review and further study of the project had been completed. No working drawings or specifications of the shrine have been prepared and no work is proceeding at the present time.
In 1955 the Royal Canadian Legion recommended the construction of a cenotaph, not identified with any war, which would become the focal point for future national remembrance and similar services. This recommendation was also referred to the advisory committee which recommended, in due course, that such a cenotaph be erected on Nepean point also, after the razing of the old printing bureau building.
This recommendation, also, was accepted by the government but no design for such a cenotaph has been prepared to date.
2. In the main, a few newspapers.
The major criticisms of the project appear to be that there is no need for a memorial 28902-5-362*
Questions
other than that now standing on confederation square, that should any new memorial be constructed it should be a living memorial such as a concert hall, auditorium, library or hospital, and that the design of the proposed memorial shrine was not suitable.


R.C.M.P. OFFICE, COMPTON-FRONTENAC CONSTITUENCY
Mr. Laiulippe: 1.	Has the R.C.M.P. a permanent office in the constituency of Compton-Frontenac and, if so (a) where (b) who are the personnel, and (c) what are the main duties of that detachment?
2.	If there is no permanent office, what R.C.M.P. detachment covers this constituency?


Mr. Chevrier:: 1. Yes; (a) Megantic, P.Q.;
(b)	Cpl. Roy, G.M., Cst. Gauthier, J.C.A.R.;
(c)	the enforcement of certain federal statutes.
2. Answered by No. 1.


TOBACCO
Mr. Mather: 1.	What is the amount in dollars which the federal government derived in 1962 as a result of the sale of tobacco products?
2.	What is the amount in dollars which the federal government spent in 1962 on public education respecting the link between excessive smoking and ill health?


John Whitney Pickersgill: 1. The following amount represents customs and excise revenue derived from tobacco products during the fiscal year ending March 31st, 1963, except as noted below; $387,574,859.
Separate statistics identifying sales tax with tobacco products are not available and therefore the above figure does not include federal sales tax which applies on the basis of 11 per cent of the manufacturer's selling price with respect to domestic tobacco products sold for consumption in Canada, and on the duty paid value of such products when imported for consumption in Canada.
2. None in 1962. For the express purpose of reviewing the evidence linking cigarette smoking with lung cancer and certain other diseases and to consider action which might be taken to ensure a co-operative and effective program, the Minister of National Health and Welfare held a conference on smoking and health in Ottawa on November 25 and 26. As a result a technical committee on health education is being set up to assist in bringing the facts before the public and to dissuade young people in particular from acquiring the habit of cigarette smoking. The federal government is prepared to make $400,000 available to assist in the development of a health education program in this field.

Questions


EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE TO CHILDREN OF WAR DEAD
Mr. Malheson: 1. How many children of war dead have received
education assistance and, in		what total amounts,
in each year, since	world war II?	
2. How many of	such children in each of these	
years, graduated with university degrees?		
Answer: 1. The Children of War Dead (Education Assistance) Act became effective		
July 1, 1953, prior to this		date there was no
provision for assistance of this nature.		
	No. in	
Year	Training	Expenditures1953-54	285	$106,7831954-55	355	$154,8551955-56	412	$182,4871956-57	462	$207,4281957-58	475	$216,0231958-59	579	$288,7641959-60	696	$377,5661960-61	821	$464,2601961-62	942	$560,3431962-63	955	$648,315The numbers record those in training each year. The total trainees approved for training	under this act is	2,925 to	March 31, 1963.No. graduated with2. Year	university degrees1953-54	11954-55	141955-56	331956-57	271957-58	541958-59	461959-60	421960-61	401961-62	491962-63	61
In addition 142 students were discontinued as entitlement expired and most of these are believed to have continued to graduation at their own expense. There were also 477 students who completed non-university courses, including 264 nurses and 136 teachers.


* NATIONAL ANTHEM
Mr. Boutin: Does the Prime Minister intend to include the adoption of "O Canada" as the national anthem of Canada when a bill is presented for the adoption of a distinctive flag for Canada?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, this question asks if the Prime Minister intends to include the adoption of "O Canada" as the national anthem of Canada when a bill is presented for the adoption of a distinctive flag for Canada. This government is committed, within two years of taking office, to take steps
[Mr. Pickersgill.l
through parliament to make "O Canada" our official national anthem. It would be natural to expect, Mr. Speaker, that parliament should deal with this matter at the same time that it will be asked to deal with the question of a distinctive national flag, to which the government is also committed.


NEWS COVERAGE FOR ARMED FORCES ABROAD
Mr. Scott: Has the government received any representations to the effect that members of the various branches of the armed forces in Europe receive almost no Canadian news coverage of events taking place in Canada and, if so, does the government have any plans to remedy this situation and what is the nature of such plans?
Answer: No such representations have been received, in so far as national defence is concerned. At the present time, Canadian news is broadcast over Radio Canadian Army Europe five times daily, Monday through Friday, with additional broadcasts on Saturday and Sunday. The R.C.A.F. No. 1 air division operates radio stations at each of its five bases. News is broadcast four to five times daily with additional coverage on Sundays. In addition, the Canadian press provides a daily newscript, Monday through Saturday, which is transmitted over the armed forces telecommunication system each night and rebroadcast over local stations. Canadian newspapers are provided through non-public funds.
News transmissions from Canada by short wave are affected by electronic and atmospheric conditions and are limited by the capability of the transmitter and receiver system on both sides of the Atlantic. As a result, the transmission reception and rebroadcast of Canadian news has never been entirely satisfactory. This has been a matter of discussion between the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the Department of External Affairs and the Department of National Defence.


FRINGE BENEFITS TO EMPLOYEES
Mr. Laiulippe: 1.	Has the federal government figures to indicate the cost of fringe benefits to employers, in cents per hour from 1947 to 1963 (a) in Canada (b) in each province?
2.	What was the average net income of a Canadian worker during the years 1947 to 1963?
3.	What taxes are levied on such income?
4.	What was the revenue of the government In the last ten years from such taxes?


John Whitney Pickersgill: 1. This information is not available.
2. So far as the taxation division of the Department of National Revenue is concerned, we do not have the necessary information to answer this question.
3 and 4. These questions could not be answered without knowing more about the

average Canadian worker referred to, such as his marital status, number of dependents, amount of donations, etc.


REROOFING OF WAREHOUSES, ORDNANCE DEPOT, LONDON, ONT.
Mr. Irvine: Have tenders been called for the reroofing of warehouses No. 2 and No. 3, 27 central ordnance depot, London, Ontario, and, if so (a) what tenders have been received and for what amounts (b) who was the successful tenderer?
Answer: Yes. The following tenders were received, conforming to the specifications set out by the Department of National Defence:
(a)	Peerless Enterprises Division of Tectum Ltd., $159,179; Williamson Roofing & Sheet Metal Ltd., $161,200; Northern Roofing Co. Ltd., $164,022; Malach Roofing & Flooring Limited, $182,947; Seeback & Sons Ltd., $210,500.
(b)	Peerless Enterprises Division of Tectum Ltd.


RECLASSIFICATION OF HOSPITAL NURSING ORDERLIES, D.V.A.
Mr. Irvine: 1.	Of the 1,737 nursing orderlies in D.V.A. hospitals who were reclassified following an increase in pay July 29, 1963, retroactive to January 1, 1963, how many (a) received a net increase in pay after reclassification, and (b) received a decrease in pay after reclassification?
2.	Of the additional 212 nursing orderlies in D.V.A. hospitals whose salary, and/or reclassification status is pending, when will the department be ready to report as to the disposition of these cases?
Answer: 1. Of the 1,737 nursing orderlies in D.V.A. hospitals who were reclassified retroactive to January 1, 1963, (a) 1,622 received a net increase in pay after reclassification, and (b) none received a decrease in pay after reclassification.
2. Of the 212 reclassifications still pending, the department has submitted 44 recommendations to the civil service commission; in approximately 113 additional cases, recommendations will be submitted to the commission within the next three or four weeks; but in approximately 55 cases, it may be some months before employees are assigned to duties which warrant higher classification since some re-organization within nursing services is involved.


R.C.M.P. DETACHMENT, MCCREARY, MAN.
Mr. Enns: 1.	How large is the R.C.M.P. detachment at McCreary, Manitoba?
2.	What are the police facilities at McCreary, and are they sufficient for efficient and effective police operations for the area?
3.	Are there any plans to replace the present building with a more complete and modern police headquarters?
Questions


Lionel Chevrier: 1. The Royal Canadian
Mounted Police detachment at McCreary, Manitoba, consists of two members of the force.
2.	There is a police owned detachment building providing accommodation for a married man and office space for two members. In addition, there is a separate one car garage. This accommodation is considered sufficient for efficient and effective police operations for the area.
3.	No, not at present.


* INTERPRETERS AND SOUND TECHNICIANS IN PARLIAMENTARY SERVICE
Mr. Cote (Chicoutimi): 1.	How many interpreters are assigned to the service of parliament?
2.	Are they requested to perform certain duties outside of parliament and, if so, do these duties interfere with their official duties?
3.	How many sound technicians are assigned to the service of parliament and has a survey been made in order to ascertain whether that number is sufficient?


Mr. Dupuis:: 1. The 11 interpreters-trans-lators are grouped under a central office which ensures the services of interpretation in the House of Commons, the Senate and committees of both houses.
2.	These interpreters are sometimes called for duty at conferences organized by various federal departments. Their services are made available to the departments only when such outside work cannot in any way affect the interpretation service in both houses of parliament and in parliamentary committees.
3.	Three sound technicians are presently assigned to the House of Commons (that is to the House of Commons itself and to committee rooms 308 and 311 in the west block). The contract provides, we understand, that those technicians are to look after the operation of the facilities in the house; however, they only have to repair the committee room equipment when there is a break. The authorities are presently considering the needs as far as those two committee rooms are concerned and the three others which will be radio-equipped at the beginning of next year.


REVENUE OF TELEVISION NETWORKS
Mr. Lalulippe: 1.	What revenue was earned by Canadian television networks during the last five years?
2.	Is there a special tax levied on the advertising of American products in Canada over these networks?


John Whitney Pickersgill: There are only two television networks in Canada. Therefore information requested is not available in

Questions
compliance with the secrecy clause of the Statistics Act which forbids divulging information which would reveal particulars relating to any individual or business.
2. No.


CAPE BRETON HIGHLANDS PARK
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
With reference to the answer to question No. 1,651, will a contract be awarded to Maritime Builders Limited, of Sydney, Nova Scotia, who were the low bidders on the improvements to the water system in the Cheticamp area of the Cape Breton Highlands national park and, if so, when will such a contract be awarded?


Mr. Laing:: No; the low bidder has been advised that funds are not now available in the amount of the tender and, accordingly, no contract will be let in the immediate future.


J. D. MCLEOD, NORTHERN AFFAIRS  QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Herridge: With reference to J. D. McLeod, chief engineer, operations division, Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources (a) what are his professional qualifications (b) how long has he been employed with the water resources branch and what duties has he performed during this period of employment (c) what experience has Mr. McLeod had in the planning and operation of large electrical power systems?


Arthur Laing: (a) Mr. McLeod graduated in 1939 with the degree of B.A.Sc. in civil engineering from the University of British Columbia. He is a member of the association of professional engineers of the province of Ontario, a member of the engineering institute of Canada, and a member of the American geophysical union.
(b) Mr. McLeod has 21 years of service with the water resources branch and its predecessors. The branch formerly was known as the water resources division and prior to that as the dominion water and power bureau. During this service his duties have included:
(i)	Junior hydraulic engineer on field and office surveys in connection with the bureau streamflow and water level program in British Columbia and the Yukon Territory.
(ii)	Office engineer responsible for computation and compilation of all streamflow and water level data for the program referred to in (i) above.
(iii)	Supervising engineer responsible for the entire program referred to in (i) above.
(iv)	Hydraulic engineer on office assignments in connection with the Columbia river investigation.
(v)	Hydraulic engineer on hydrological reconnaissance of streams in the Fraser river basin.

(vi)	Senior hydraulic engineer and chief of the international waterways section of the water resources division; responsible for division studies, reports and data on international water problems on the Columbia, Waterton, Belly, Souris, Red and Saint John river systems. These studies, reports and data included both those undertaken solely by the division and those undertaken in co-operation with other government agencies, consulting engineers and representatives of private corporations, among them the corps of engineers, United States army; United States bureau of reclamation; the federal power commission (United States); The Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario; Manitoba hydro; The New Brunswick Electric Power Commission; B.C. Power Commission (now B.C. Hydro); Montreal Engineering Company Limited; Shawinigan Engineering Company Limited; H.G. Acres Company Limited; Crippen-Wright Engineering Limited; and the national research council.
(vii)	Assistant chief of the water resources division with continuing responsibility for international water problems as outlined in
(vi)	above and additional responsibilities as member or secretary of various international engineering boards established by the international joint commission to investigate these problems as well as with responsibility for numerous other division functions. Appointed member for Canada of the Canadian and international control boards responsible for the regulation of storage in the Winnipeg river system in Ontario and Minnesota and in lake Memphremagog in Quebec and Vermont.
(viii)	Chief of the water resources division and hence responsible for all division activities and functions; associated responsibilities included those on international water problems as outlined in (vii) above.
(ix)	Chief engineer of the water resources branch; responsible for all activities and functions of the branch operations division; associated responsibilities included those on international water problems as outlined in (vii) above.
(x)	Acting director, water resources branch; responsible for all branch activities and functions including associated responsibilities on international water problems as outlined in
(vii)	above.
(c)	In the course of his duties in the water resources branch and its predecessors Mr. McLeod has participated actively in studies of international water matters, including their national aspects both for the department and for the Department of External Affairs, as well as for the international joint commission. Many of these studies have included the performance of detailed investigations, planning,

development of preliminary designs, performance of flowage appraisal surveys, preparation of estimates, programming and performance of studies to determine most effective system power operation and review of economic factors involved in the generation of hydroelectric power as well as in other water uses. Certain of these studies have included assessment of flood control requirements and development of measures to meet these requirements as well as preparation of cost estimates of such measures and of benefit-cost project studies. He also has participated in national and federal-provincial water studies of a similar nature.


G. M. MACNABB, NORTHERN AFFAIRS   QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Herridge: With reference to G. M. MacNabb, special projects division water resources branch, Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources (a) what are his professional qualifications (b) how long has he been employed with the water resources branch and what duties has he performed during this period of employment (c) what experience has Mr. MacNabb had in the planning and operation of large electrical power systems?


Arthur Laing: (a) Mr. MacNabb graduated in 1954 with the degree of B.Sc. in civil engineering from Queen's University. He is a member
of the association of professional engineers of the province of Ontario.
(b) Mr. MacNabb has almost 10 years of service with the water resources branch, (formerly water resources division). During this service his duties have included:
(i)	Junior hydraulic engineer on field and office surveys in connection with the division streamflow and water level program in British Columbia and the Yukon territory.
(ii)	Hydraulic engineer on field and office assignments in connection with the Columbia river investigation.
(iii)	Hydraulic and senior hydraulic engineer in the division and branch with increasing responsibilities for studies, reports and data on international and federal-provincial water problems particularly on the Columbia, Ottawa and Saint John river systems. These studies, reports and data have included both those undertaken solely by the division or branch and those undertaken in co-operation with other government agencies, consulting engineers and representatives of private corporations, among them the corps of engineers, United States army; United States bureau of reclamation; the federal power commission (United States); the Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario; the New Brunswick electric power commission; B.C. power commission (now B.C. hydro); Montreal engineer-
Questions
ing company limited; H. G. Acres company limited; and Crippen-Wright engineering limited.
(iv)	Senior hydraulic engineer (engineer 6); responsible for continuing study requirements on problems related to the Columbia river treaty; member of the government of Canada team of negotiators at the official level and member for the government of Canada of two work groups established by the Canada-British Columbia-United States policy negotiators to make specific determinations and plans for handling of the downstream power benefits that will accrue to Canada under the Columbia river treaty.
(c) In the course of his duties in the water resources branch and the division, Mr. MacNabb has participated actively in studies of international water matters including their national aspects both for the department and for the Department of External Affairs, as well as for the international joint commission. Many of these studies have included the performance of detailed investigations, planning, development of preliminary designs, performance of flowage appraisal surveys, preparation of estimates, programming and performance of studies to determine most effective system power operation and review of economic factors involved in the generation of hydro electric power as well as in other water uses. Certain of these studies have included assessment of flood control requirements and development of measures to meet these requirements as well as preparation of cost estimates of such measures and of benefit-cost project studies. He has participated extensively in digital computer programming and operations essential to the solution of numerous questions encountered in these studies and is recognized as highly proficient in these fields. He also has participated in national and federal-provincial water studies of a similar nature.


HISTORIC SITE, BOULARDERIE ISLAND, N.S.
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
1.	What consideration has been given by the historic sites and monuments board in regard to the historical importance of the Count de la Bou-larderie settlement on Boularderie island?
2.	Have any recommendations been made by the board on this matter and, if so, what consideration will be given them?


Arthur Laing: The board has not yet fully considered this question, which will appear on the agenda for the next meeting, (spring, 1964).
2. N/A.


Mr. H. A. Olson (Medicine Hat):: Before we move from questions, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I may have the permission of the

Motions for Papers
house to change the wording of question No. 1,730 so I could get some information. The wording now used calls for the tabling of names of certain sheep producers who have been paid. I realize that there is some difficulty and that it would possibly discredit some of these flocks of sheep if the recipients of awards for scrapie were made known.
I should like to change the wording and ask, what was the total amount of money paid out; in how many provinces has it been paid-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: -how many recipients there were. I should like also, Mr. Speaker, to ask how many recipients-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. May I suggest to the hon. member that the better way is to withdraw his question and put a new question on the order paper.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: I should like to ask for that permission.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the house agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 160-Mr. Nielsen:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of a general assessment of the Battelle institute report to the Alaska international rail and highway commission, and of the latter's recommendations to the United States congress, prepared by the economic division of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, May 26, 1961.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I was speaking to the minister's deputy this morning and he probably did not get an opportunity to call me back; no doubt he has been speaking with the minister. If the minister can assure me that there is material in these documents which would be prejudicial to any negotiations which may now or in the future be conducted with the United States concerning the joint paving of the Alaska highway, then I withdraw my motion.
Arthur Laing: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for again making the same commitment that he made last Wednesday in respect of this motion. I can assure him that if the report which he asked for, dated 1961, were made public it would be accompanied by a series of calculations and recommendations to the government which would demarcate the government's bargaining position in any conclusions or agreements made with the

United States government if we arrive at the position where such a mutual undertaking was in prospect.


Erik Nielsen: Then I withdraw my motion.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.


ECONOMIC REPORT ON HAINES ROAD
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 161-Mr. Nielsen:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of an economic report on the road from Haines, Alaska, to Haines Junction, Yukon Territory, prepared by the economic division in 1961.
Arthur Laing: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask that this motion be transferred for debate.


Mr. Speaker:: Pursuant to standing order 47 this motion is transferred to notices of motions (papers).


CORRESPONDENCE WITH WORLD FAIR CORPORATION
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 162-Mr. Valade:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence between the government, any parliamentary secretary or executive assistant to any minister of the crown, including the Prime Minister's office, and any member, full time employee or subcontractor of the world fair corporation.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could say a word about this motion. I spoke to the hon. gentleman and he said he would consider the matter. I have spoken to the Minister of Public Works, who would be very glad to talk over with the hon. gentleman the possibility of making public anything that can properly be made public. I wonder whether in the circumstances, in view of the fact that this is correspondence with a public corporation set up by parliament, the hon. gentleman would agree to withdraw his motion?


Mr. Valade:: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the house to transfer this motion for debate because of the amendment the Prime Minister has proposed respecting the world fair corporation and also because of the technical difficulties which have occurred in setting up this land for the corporation. I would therefore like the house to transfer this matter for debate.


Mr. Speaker:: Pursuant to standing order 47 this motion is transferred to notices of motions (papers).


DELAY IN EXECUTION OF WARRANT AGAINST HAL BANKS
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 167-Mr. Diefenbaker:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all letters or other communications, or memos or records of telephone conversations since October

1, 1963, between the Minister of Justice or anyone acting on his behalf, and the commissioner of the R.C.M.P. or other officer, having to do with a direction given by the Minister of Justice, that the carrying out and execution of the explicit terms of the said warrant that the peace officers should forthwith arrest Hal Banks of Montreal on the charge of conspiracy to commit an assault should be delayed, together with any further letters or communications which altered or varied said direction.
Lionel Chevrier: It is a well established rule that letters and other communications between ministers and officials, or between officials, and memoranda and records relating to conversations between ministers and officials, or between officials, are privileged and cannot be produced. I therefore cannot agree to produce any such material which might exist.
I have in mind a number of motions which I made when I was on the other side of the house, one in particular which was refused and which I have no right to go into at this time, and another which was made by my colleague the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate asking for production of the "Canadian Economic Outlook" for 1958, to which the former prime minister replied by stating the information was confidential and could not be produced. If the Leader of the Opposition is not willing to accept this, or is not willing to withdraw his motion, my suggestion is that the motion be transferred for debate at a later date.


Mr. Diefenbaker:: I do not accept the suggestion of the minister that this is privileged. The words of the warrant are mandatory and do not permit of interference by the Minister of Justice. In ordinary circumstances I would agree that letters, memoranda or verbal instructions of the kind to which the hon. gentleman has referred would not be producible when the minister acts according to law; but in the wording of the warrant, form 7, the following appears:	"This is,
therefore, to command you-" that is, the peace officer

 "in Her Majesty's name forthwith to arrest the accused".
This being so, the action admittedly taken by the Minister of Justice cannot be justified, and when he acts above the law what he does must be producible; otherwise lawlessness would be condoned and encouraged.


Lionel Chevrier: As Your Honour knows, this question is not debatable, and I made no attempt to debate it at the time. I would simply say to the right hon. gentleman that if he wants this matter placed on the order paper for debate I am quite satisfied, and I hope to be able to bring forward instances, when he was in office, of a position being taken identical with that taken by the Minister of Justice on this occasion.
28902-5-363
Motions for Papers


John George Diefenbaker: At no time was there any act of lawlessness.


Mr. Speaker:: Is there a request that this motion be transferred for debate?


Lionel Chevrier: Yes, Mr. Speaker, as far as I am concerned.


Mr. Speaker:: It is so ordered.


SELLING AND PRICING OF NEW DRUGS
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 170-Mr. Howard:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of telegrams, correspondence, and other documents exchanged between the government, the restrictive trade practices commission, or the combines investigation branch, and any person, organization, or company since January 1, 1961, regarding the question of hearings by the restrictive trade practices commission concerning the selling and pricing policies of certain pharmaceutical houses in respect of new types of drugs.
Lionel Chevrier: I am prepared to accept the motion subject to the reservation that memoranda prepared within the department or documents of a similar nature ordinarily considered as privileged, and correspondence and material of a private and confidential nature obtained or received in the course of the inquiry and not included in the report of the commission and in other material made public under the act should not be produced. In these circumstances I trust the hon. member will accept these reservations, and I hope he will be prepared to withdraw the motion.


Mr. Howard:: There was no such reservation expressed by the hon. gentleman when he sat in opposition and voted for such a motion, but in view of the changed attitude he has now, I will withdraw the motion. It means nothing now.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn. CORRESPONDENCE WITH MISS KAHN-TINETA HORN
Motion No. 172-Mr. Howard:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between Dr. P. E. Moore of the Department of National Health and Welfare or any other person in the government and a Miss Kahn-Tineta Horn or any other person or organization since January 1, 1963 dealing with the subject matter identified by file No. 800-1-9 (M12) or file No. 100-1-9 (M12).


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Haidasz:: Return tabled.


DISMISSAL FROM R.C.A.F. OF PETER CRANSTON
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 174-Mr. Orlikow:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence between Mr. Peter Cranston, formerly a squadron leader in the R.C.A.F. and
[Stage Direction]
Motions for Papers
the Prime Minister, Minister of Justice, and Minister of National Defence, dealing with the dismissal of Mr. Cranston from the R.C.A.F.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I have had discussions with the minister, and I am prepared to withdraw this motion.
Mr. Speaker:: The motion is withdrawn.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.


CONSTRUCTION OF ATOM SMASHERS
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 178-Mr. Orlikow:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence between the Canadian association of physicists and the government of Canada, its departments and commissions regarding the building of equipment usually referred to as particle accelerators or atom smashers.
Mr. Drury:: Mr. Speaker, I have not had an opportunity to ascertain from the mover of the motion exactly what he has in mind in using the word "commissions". There is no question about the government of Canada and its departments, but I am not sure what he has in mind in relation to "commissions". Subject to clarification of this point we have no objection to the motion.


Mr. Speaker:: The motion is accepted subject to the reservations as stated by the minister.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 179-Mr. Cowan:
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 dated August 15, 1962 to December 1, 1962 between the government of Canada or any minister, department or agency thereof and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the Canadian National Railways, the Canadian Pacific Railways and the Bell Telephone Company of Canada, respecting the contract for telecommunications for the approximately 195 radio stations, the previous ten-year contract having been replaced by a new contract effective October 1, 1962.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I regret very much that I have not had a chance to talk to the Minister of Transport about this motion, as I had hoped and intended to do, and I wonder whether the hon. member would mind allowing it to stand until next week.


Mr. Cowan:: Mr. Speaker, it has taken a year to get this far, so I presume another week will not hurt.


Mr. Speaker:: Stand.
Motion stands.


RECOMMENDATIONS RESPECTING HEAVY WATER PLANT
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 180-Mr. Thompson:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of any recommendations made by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited to the Department of Industry, trade and commerce and/or finance subsequent to May 31, 1963, and relating to proposals which has been received on that date by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited for the construction of a processing plant to produce heavy water together with copies of (a) any further recommendations or correspondence made by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited to the government in regard to the Cape Breton site (b) the proposal of Deuterium of Canada Limited to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited for the construction of a processing plant for heavy water in the form originally received (c) the final proposal submitted by Deuterium of Canada Limited as accepted by the government and as announced by the Minister of Industry on December 2, 1963.
Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I have had an opportunity of discussing this matter with the mover of the motion and have pointed out to him that as the recommendations and correspondence under (a) are internal, they are privileged. In respect of (b), the proposal of Deuterium of Canada Limited, I have undertaken to provide the hon. member with the information he seeks. In respect of (c), the final proposal has not yet been negotiated and therefore does not exist. In the light of this I think the hon. member is agreeable to withdrawing his motion.


Mr. Thompson:: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the first and third parts are not available and that I have been able to obtain the necessary information with regard to part (b), which is not classified, I agree to withdraw the motion.


Mr. Speaker:: The motion is withdrawn.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.


CONSTRUCTION IN CANADA OF BAC-111 PLANES
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 181-Mr. Gregoire:
That an order of the house do Issue for a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and documents exchanged between the Minister of Industry or any of the officers of his department and the president or any of the officers or employees of the British Aircraft Corporation concerning the total or partial construction of BAC-lll's in Canada.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether I could say a word about all the motions standing in the name of the hon. member for Lapointe. Some of them concern the Minister of Industry and some of them concern the Minister of Transport, for whom I am acting in his absence from the house. I would hope that the hon. gentleman would be willing to allow these motions to stand until next week so that conversations could take place between the two ministers directly

concerned, which has not been possible since the motions appeared on the order paper.


Mr. Gregoire:: Mr. Speaker, since next week will be the last of the session, I suggest that this would amount to killing those notices of motion. Since their subject matter is very important, I would like the parliamentary secretary to agree to the tabling of those documents today, on behalf of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Mcllraith).


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the desire of the hon. member that I put the motion or that I allow the motion to stand?


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I would ask you to put the question, especially as far as motion No. 183 is concerned.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, if you are calling No. 181 in the name of the hon. member for Lapointe, in the circumstances I would ask that this be transferred for debate.


Mr. Speaker:: The motion is transferred for debate.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.
I have just heard the Secretary of State (Mr. Pickersgill) recommend to the Minister of Industry (Mr. Drury) that all notices of motion be transferred for debate. Since we are getting near the end of the session, I feel that the government is using this procedure to prevent us from having the documents in question.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The motion is transferred for debate.


CONSTRUCTION IN CANADA OF CARAVELLE PLANES
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 182
Gilles Grégoire: That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, telegrams or documents exchanged between the Minister of Transport or any of the officers of his department and the president or any of the officers or employees of the Compagnie Sud-Aviation of France concerning the total or partial construction of Caravelles in Canada.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I would ask that this be transferred for debate.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say to the Secretary of State that it is certainly not because of the absence of the Minister of Transport that the Minister of 28902-5-363}
Motions for Papers
Industry has asked that a question concerning his department be transferred for debate.
However, in view of the absence of the Minister of Transport and the suggestion made by the Secretary of State, if we could have the assurance that the motion will be debated and carried when the Minister of Transport comes back to the house, I would accept to have the motion stand for the time being.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, if I might rise on a question of privilege, the hon. gentleman has suggested something is being done that is contrary to the rules. I made the suggestion to the hon. gentleman that he allow his motions to stand so there could be a conference. They would then have to come up next week and be dealt with, but the hon. gentleman refused what is a reasonable request, and one which I have never before known to be refused in the house when a minister was absent.
Therefore he left the government with no choice but to transfer these motions for debate. But if the hon. gentleman would accede to the original request and allow them to stand until next week so this conference can take place, an endeavour will be made by the government to make available all the information that can properly be made available.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, the position I take, and the position I stand on, is that there must be a conference between the two ministers, and an endeavour will be made by the government to give all the information that is properly produceable under the rules. If that is acceptable to the hon. gentleman we will not transfer these for debate, but if it is not acceptable we will just act according to the rules of the house.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I accept. In view of the fact that the Secretary of State, knowing his procedure as well as he does, can catch us off guard, I accept his suggestion.


Mr. Speaker:: Motion 181 will stand; motion 182 will stand; motion 183 will stand-


John Whitney Pickersgill: All the rest.


Mr. Speaker:: Motion 184-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could we not stand them all at once, sir?
5696	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Speaker:: Motions 181 to 193 inclusive will stand.
Motions stand.


INDUSTRY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. George C. Nowlan (Digby-Annapolis-
Kings): Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the Minister of Industry. In view of the reports which appeared in this morning's press to the effect that he has a group of experts in Toronto considering the proposal which has been made by British American Oil with respect to the development of heavy water, I would like to ask him when he expects to have a report from this group of experts, and will it be in time to permit a discussion of this matter if the minister's estimates are called on Friday, which should be the case if the report is available? If the report is not available, then possibly the estimates would be deferred. I would like to have the minister comment on that.
Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I have been advised by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited that they would hope to have this report for me by late Monday night, but not before then. In these circumstances I do not think the hon. member would want to push scientific personnel to try to rush their assessment.


Mr. Nowlan:: I am sure the minister will advise the house as soon as a report is available, in any event.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I will be glad to do that.


Mr. Robert Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria):: As a supplementary question I would just like to ask the minister if at that time-the time he has suggested-when his estimates are before the house, he will be in a position to provide the house and the country with a complete, comprehensive and factual report on this very important question.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: The answer to that is no, because I will not know by that time what will be the scientific assessment of this new process claimed by British American Oil.


Robert Muir: As a supplementary question, would the minister give an assurance that he will provide the house and the country with all the information that is available at that time?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I am not sure what the hon. member means by "at that time." Is that following Monday?
[Mr. Pickersgill.i


Robert Muir: When your estimates are on.


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: The point we would like to know from the minister is, will he defer the discussion of his estimates until he has received this report from atomic energy and is able to tell the house what decision the government has made with respect to the heavy water plant?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: If the house so wishes, I think it might be a useful thing to defer consideration of the estimates until this situation has been clarified.


CONSIDERATION OF FRENCH CANADIANS IN MAKING SENIOR APPOINTMENTS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerard Chapdelaine (Sherbrooke):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Industry?
Could the hon. gentleman tell us whether it is true, as reported in La Presse yesterday, that some Quebec Liberal members are bringing pressure to bear on him to have French Canadians appointed as high officials in his department so that the French Canadian element be adequately represented in the Department of Industry?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of such pressure.


Gérard Chapdelaine: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a supplementary question?
Could the minister inform the house whether he would let me exert such pressure?


FINANCE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr.  R. Gordon L. Fairweather@Royal: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. Will the minister advise the house as to the nature of the "limited assurances from Ottawa that the Canadian exchange rate will be preserved at its present level," which Gordon E. Grundy, president of the automotive division of Studebaker was reported in yesterday's Ottawa Citizen as having said was a factor in the decision to move auto production to Canada?


Hon. Walter L. Gordon (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I have nothing further to add to what I said on June 13 last in this house.


Mr. Fairwealher:: As a supplementary question, were these limited assurances given to Studebaker by the minister himself or by one of his officials?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: The limited assurances were not given by me, and whether they were given by anybody in Ottawa I do not know.


FEDERAL DISTRICT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Leon Balcer (Three Rivers):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister.
In view of the attitude reminiscent of the middle ages the mayor of Ottawa has taken toward bilingualism, does he not feel the government should take this opportunity to consider the possibility of establishing a federal district which would include Ottawa, Hull and the surrounding area?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I would hesitate to characterize any attitude of the mayor of Ottawa as medieval. In medieval times most educated people spoke Latin as well as their own language. On the particular matter of the federal district, this is a question that has aroused interest from time to time and has been under consideration by governments. No doubt it will receive consideration again in the future.


COLUMBIA RIVER
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Does the minister consider the circumstances warrant his giving the house some definitive information as to the crucial negotiations on the Columbia river treaty, or is he precluded from doing so by a continuing contrariety?


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of Stale for External Affairs):: Would my hon. friend repeat the last part of his observation?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Does the minister consider the circumstances warrant his giving the house some definitive information as to the crucial negotiations on the Columbia river treaty, or is he precluded from doing so by a continuing contrariety?
Inquiries of the Ministry


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, this is the Christmas season-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Crouse:: Tell us about Santa Claus.


Paul Joseph James Martin: -and I am disposed to give my hon. friend the complete information for which he asks. With that in mind, I can only refer him to the informative reply that I gave yesterday.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, directed to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. Did any of the officials of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources give Mr. Paddy Sherman the figures he used in a broadcast this morning related to the price for downstream benefits in the negotiations, figures which are denied at the present time to members of this house.


Arthur Laing: Mr. Speaker, I am conscious of the Christmas season too. As far as I know, no figures were sought by Mr. Sherman or given to him by any member of my department.


Mr. Stuart A. Fleming (Okanagan-Revel-sloke):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. In view of the fact that the Canadian government negotiating position, which apparently takes into account the position of the government of British Columbia, has been revealed to officials of the United States government, is there any reason now why this house may not share in those details?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, there is an excellent reason why, when negotiations are under way, they should be kept within the negotiating groups.


Stuart A. Fleming: A
supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that both sides now know their definite positions in this matter, could the house not have some idea of what are the intentions of the government, even if not in detail?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, those intentions will be revealed at the appropriate time.


UNITED NATIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbill (Oxford):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs.



Inquiries of the Ministry According to today's Globe and Mail the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has now served notice at the United Nations that it will not permit the expansion of the security council at the present time. Will the Secretary of State for External Affairs tell the house what informal arrangements have now been made to rearrange the traditional seating arrangements for non-permanent members of that body so as to provide for appropriate Asian and African representation thereon; and what scheme, if any, has now been agreed upon so that in future Canada will have an opportunity to be represented on the security council?


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secrelary of Slate for External Affairs: Mr. Speaker, I think my hon. friend will agree that he answered his own question when he told us that the Soviet union has made a declaration of its intention not to agree, as a member of the security council, to the expansion of that and other bodies until such time as the Chinese people's republic has been admitted to the United Nations.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Perhaps the Secretary of State for External Affairs did not quite understand my question. I asked him what scheme had been arranged, if any-and I take it perhaps this has not been done-so that Canada will be assured of representation on that body in the future; because as the Secretary of State for External Affairs well knows, since Russia will not permit the expansion of the council the informal arrangements for seating members which have existed until recently will have to be rearranged.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: The commonwealth seat continues until such time as the big five and the assembly have agreed, pursuant to United Nations procedure, to another arrangement for representation on the council. Until that decision is taken, the status quo continues.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Do 1 understand that the Secretary of State for External Affairs is telling this house that the commonwealth seat, under an informal arrangement which has existed until recently, is still in existence?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: Mr. Speaker, I think my hon. friend will see from the answer I have given to his question that there is nothing further I can add. The situation will not change until such time as the assembly agrees to another arrangement.
[Mr. Nesbitt.)


INQUIRIES OF THE MINISTRY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jean-Pierre  Cole@Longueuil: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the President of the Privy Council. Does the minister intend to appoint Miss Charlotte Whitton to the royal commission on bilingualism and biculturalism, in view of certain statements published in the newspapers?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. There will be no applause from the gallery, please.


Hon. Maurice Lamonlagne (President of Ihe Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, the government will examine that request together with the qualifications of the mayor of Ottawa.


An hon. Member:: She is a Conservative.


Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolielle-L'Assomplion-Monlcalm):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a supplementary question. Is it the intention of the President of the Privy Council to recommend as well that Mr. Gordon McGregor, president of Trans-Canada Air Lines be appointed to that same commission?


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I have a question for the Prime Minister. Is it the intention of the Prime Minister to be accompanied by Mr. McGregor, president of T.C.A., on his next trip to France?


OBJECTION TO &quot;HANSARD&quot; PRACTICE RESPECTING CAPITALIZATION
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Colin Cameron (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands):: Mr. Speaker, I have a point of privilege that I wish to raise. We hear a great deal these days of linguistic rights, and my point of privilege has to do with the breaches of accepted English usage to which hon. members of this house are subjected when their speeches are reported in Hansard. I have reference to the odd and peculiar formula for capitalization that is insisted upon by the Hansard authorities. Yesterday I made a short speech in the house in which I made one or two references to an international body, the international monetary fund. In spite of my request to Hansard that these three words should be capitalized-as they should be according to literate and accepted English usage-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Colin Cameron: -I find them again in lower case. I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that it is intolerable that members of this house should be subjected to this illiterate misusage of English and some steps should be taken to correct the situation. I propose to raise it on every occasion upon which I am subjected to this sort of nonsense again.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr.  R. Gordon L. Fairwealher@Royal: Mr. Speaker, I discussed this problem with the Secretary, of State and I have the same question of privilege to raise. 1 give three examples of this in a speech I made on December 3. The first is the University of New Brunswick, which obviously should be capitalized; the Canadian universities foundation should be capitalized, and finally the Canadian universities service overseas. In all these cases correct English would dictate a capital being used.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, perhaps since there is no English academy this question might be referred to the Academie Francaise.


RETENTION OP SESSIONAL STAFF DURING RECESS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Secretary of State supplementary to the question asked him yesterday by the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency. Does the decision to retain members' secretaries on staff during the period between this session and the next apply also to messengers and other members of the sessional staff of the House of Commons?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I will have to make inquiries about that.


RAILWAYS, AIR LINES AND SHIPPING REQUEST OF FRENCH GOVERNMENT FOR STATEMENT BY T.C.A. PRESIDENT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I wish to put a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Has the French government or the French embassy requested a copy of the evidence given by Mr. Gordon McGregor before the sessional committee on railways, air lines and shipping?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I have received no such request.
Inquiries of the Ministry SUGAR


INQUIRY AS TO CONTRACT WITH RHODESIA
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Robert C. Coates (Cumberland):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Trade and Commerce which I shall direct to his parliamentary secretary in the absence of the minister. Can the Minister of Trade and Commerce inform the house when a long term sugar contract with Rhodesia might be concluded, in view of the continuing exorbitant prices being charged for this commodity and in view of the fact that it continues to be available in the United States at a lower price than is the case in Canada?


Mr. Jean-Luc Pepin (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I will take this question as notice, Mr. Speaker.


TRANSPORT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Bow River):: Mr. Speaker, my question originally was to be addressed to the Minister of Transport, but in his absence I address it to the Minister of Agriculture. Are the minister or his departmental officials considering approaching or making plans to approach farm cooperative organizations, wheat pools and line elevator company officials to improve elevator and other facilities so that Canada, with a surplus of grain, could meet the demand for western wheat?


Hon. Harry W. Hays (Minister of Agriculture):: I will take that question as notice, Mr. Speaker.


KETTLE VALLEY RAILWAY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: In
the absence of the Minister of Transport I wish to direct a question of imminent significance to the right hon. Prime Minister. In view of the right of any interested party, person or company to appeal to the governor in council by way of a petition against any decision of the board of transport commissioners, is the Prime Minister prepared to accept such a petition from the member for Kootenay West on behalf of the Rossland chamber of commerce appealing against the decision of the board of transport commissioners authorizing the discontinuance of passenger service on the Kettle valley railway?
5700	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry


Lester Bowles Pearson: I shall have to take this question as notice and discuss it with my colleague the Minister of Transport.


HUMAN RIGHTS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the right hon. Prime Minister. In the British House of Commons Mr. Peter Thomas, joint minister of state for foreign affairs, referring to the forced resignation of Lord Mancroft from the board of the Norwich Union Insurance Societies, said that the government "strongly disapproves of pressure from any source on British firms to discriminate between British subjects on any grounds". I would like to ask, in view of this statement, whether the Prime Minister is prepared to make a statement on behalf of the Canadian government registering the government's disapproval of the political discrimination practised by the same company against Mr. James Ren wick of Toronto.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I can only say, Mr. Speaker, that the government disapproves of discrimination in any form.


LABOUR RELATIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Frank Howard: I should like to ask the Minister of Fisheries if Mr. Justice Dryer, who was appointed as arbitrator of the dispute in the B.C. fishing industry earlier this summer, has tendered his resignation from that position. If so, when did the minister hear of this?


Hon. H. J. Robichaud (Minister of Fisheries):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to advise the hon. member that I received a letter last week from Mr. Justice Dryer advising that in view of his heavy responsibilities, there would be undue delay in proceeding with the arbitration which he accepted early last summer. In view of this we are prepared to accept his resignation, and I am attempting to communicate with the minister of labour for British Columbia, Hon. L. R. Peterson, in order to appoint a new arbitrator.


Frank Howard: May I ask a supplementary question. Does the minister not feel, in view of the speed with which the government acted last summer when this dispute was in


progress, that he should speed things up now? The whole process is being delayed, for which the minister is primarily responsible, and this is inimical to the interests of the people concerned.


Mr. Speaker:: Order; there is no question-


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Within a few hours after receiving the letter from the chief justice I tried to communicate by telephone with the minister of labour for British Columbia. I was told he was unavoidably absent for a period of ten days. In the meantime my office is communicating with the office of the minister in order to locate him, and this is being done today.


Frank Howard: May I ask a supplementary question. When the minister was in Vancouver to attend a meeting of the north Pacific fisheries commission, did he then not try to get in touch with Mr. Peterson?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Yes, I did try to get in touch with Mr. Peterson and I did get in touch with him, notwithstanding the statement to the contrary that was made by the secretary of the united fishermen and allied workers. At that time Mr. Justice Dryer had not tendered his resignation. I contacted him the next day in Montreal where I was attending the resource ministers' meeting. At that time Mr. Justice Dryer informed me he thought he would be able to carry on with the arbitration. However, only a week later, he reconsidered his position and advised me he was not able to do so without unduly delaying proceedings.


MARITIME UNIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Reid Scott (Danforth):: Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Minister of Labour a question. In view of the fact that the maritime unions trustees today held a press conference in Montreal to bring the press up to date on their activities at the present time, and in view of the fact that during the conference they outlined certain deficiencies in the federal legislation which led. to difficulties on the great lakes, I wonder whether the minister could get a transcript of the press conference so that members of parliament could be aware of the information that has now been placed in the public domain.


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of Labour):: I will make inquiries, Mr. Speaker, to meet that request.



[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Labour whether he has made any inquiries regarding the questionnaire to which I alluded yesterday; and second, whether the interim report by the trustees appointed in connection with great lakes shipping is now in his possession.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: No, Mr. Speaker, I have received no report. As I indicated to the house yesterday I expect to be seeing Mr. Justice Dryer very soon, and I hope to have a discussion about this matter and about the possibility of a report to parliament at the earliest possible date. At that time I intend also to raise the question of the questionnaire; and in light of the further question of the Leader of the Opposition I may wish to be in touch with Mr. Justice Dryer very soon.


PENSIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of press reports to the effect that the Canadian Chamber of Commerce has submitted to the Prime Minister and the government a brief urging the government to scrap the Canada pension plan, I wonder whether a copy of this brief and of the Prime Minister's reply, which I hope was an appropriate one, could be added to the return the house ordered under motion for production of papers No. 105 which was passed on October 23 but which has not yet been brought down?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, there is no reason why the brief should not be added to the return in question. My comment on that part of the brief, while appropriate, was purely oral and there would be no record of that. However, I assure my hon. friend that what I told them was in line with the assurance I have already given to the house on this matter.


INQUIRIES FOR RETURNS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Gordon Churchill (Winnipeg South Centre):: I should like to ask a question of the house leader. Will he report to the house with regard to the questions passed as orders for returns?
Inquiries of the Ministry


John Whitney Pickersgill: By an extraordinary coincidence I anticipated this question today.


George Clyde Nowlan: A guilty conscience.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It was just anticipation. I have in my hands a list of the returns which are still outstanding, and I shall be glad to lay that on the table. I should like to report that out of 96 questions which have been made orders for returns since the beginning of the session, there are only four outstanding; out of 107 motions for the production of papers which have been accepted and passed, only 37 are still outstanding. I believe this is some kind of record.


Erik Nielsen: I have a question for the Postmaster General arising out of his acceptance on December 4 of my motion for the production of papers No. 152. I wonder whether the minister could say if he could table that correspondence in time for the consideration of his estimates, which will be under discussion today or tomorrow?


Hon. Azellus Denis (Postmaster General):: do not know if the documents are going to be ready by this afternoon or tomorrow. The motion was accepted only last week, but we are doing our utmost to be able to produce these documents. If we cannot, then I will try to answer all the questions the hon. member may ask during the discussion of the estimates.


AGRICULTURE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Raymond Langlois (Meganiic):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, but in his absence I shall direct it to the Minister of Agriculture. Since consideration is being given to the formation of an eastern feed grain board, can the minister say if this board can obtain feed grains directly from the Canadian wheat board?


Harry William Hays: As I suggested in the house the other day, we are having a meeting of eastern ministers on the 16th, 17th and 18th, when these matters will be discussed. Until that time I do not have any announcements to make.


Raymond Langlois: May I ask a supplementary question and raise a point of order on the answer the minister has given. This subject is of concern to the federal government, not to the provincial ministers. Has the minister

Inquiries of the Ministry or the government any intention of purchas- not be too great a mail delivery load after ing such grain, or is there any possibility of the Boxing day holiday?
graTn boafd?SUCh ^	** 63816111 f6ed Mr- Denis: I will do my best, Mr. Speaker.


Harry William Hays: I have nothing to add. The wheat board is under the Minister of Trade and Commerce, and probably the hon. member should address his question to him.


POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gilbert Rondeau (Shefford):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Postmaster General?
Can the minister assure us that he sent us all the correspondence he exchanged with all his consultants since last April 8?


Azellus Denis: Mr. Speaker, the answer is yes, as far as official correspondence is concerned.


Gilbert F. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a supplementary question?
Why did not the minister send us that correspondence in our respective ridings as it was exchanged with his consultants?


Azellus Denis: Mr. Speaker, you will note that the questions asked by hon. members opposite, especially those of the new Social Credit party, have been numerous and required inquiries in the various ridings of the province to gather as much of the correspondence as possible.


ANNOUNCEMENT OF STAFF HOLIDAY ON BOXING DAY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Azellus Denis: Mr. Speaker, in answer to the question asked yesterday by the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre, I am pleased to inform him that December 26 has been declared a holiday with pay for all civil servants, which includes postal employees. Where the 26th is observed as a holiday there would normally be no letter carrier delivery. Employees required to work on December 26 would be compensated in accordance with the civil service regulations.


Mr. J. E. Pascoe (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre):: May I ask a question on that, Mr. Speaker.
I want to thank the Postmaster General for this announcement, but will he make this decision public immediately and continue to urge the public to mail early, so there will


PENITENTIARIES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: On Monday the hon. member for Vancouver East asked me whether the commissioner of penitentiaries had completed his investigation into the riots at St. Vincent de Paul and the alleged attacks by guards on the alleged leaders of the riots. A summary of the findings and recommendations of the commission of inquiry convened by the commissioner of penitentiaries under the Penitentiary Act in respect of the riots was tabled in the house in June last.
With respect to the question of alleged attacks by guards on the alleged leaders of the riots, I presume that the hon. member is referring to the case of Alvin Gunn. On October 29 last I tabled a statement with respect to this case, and it was printed in Hansard at page 4134. This investigation, which was limited in scope, was conducted by the regional director of penitentiaries over a two day period, and evidence was not taken under oath.
In the light of the findings of that inquiry the commissioner of penitentiaries, acting pursuant to the powers that he has under the Penitentiary Act, appointed a legal officer of the Department of Justice, Mr. Louis Philippe Landry, as a commissioner to inquire into and report upon the alleged physical abuse used against Gunn. Mr. Landry, acting under his powers to subpoena witnesses and take evidence under oath, conducted an inquiry accordingly and reported his findings to the commissioner. The finding was that Alvin Gunn had been severely beaten by eight penitentiary officers and that the beating was not necessary under the circumstances.
At the time of Mr. Landry's inquiry five of the officers had already resigned or were under suspension for other reasons. The remaining three officers were charged before a disciplinary board under the penitentiary regulations with the offence of having used excessive force against Gunn. The board found one of them guilty and recommended a severe reprimand. The board concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to justify conviction of the remaining two officers.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: supplementary question. May I ask the minister what is involved in a "severe reprimand" for a guard beating a prisoner?


Lionel Chevrier: Having regard to the fact that there were a number of others and that five of them have resigned or been suspended, I presume that in the case of the guard in question the part he took in the incident was less grievous than the part played by the others and warranted, in the eyes of the disciplinary board, a reprimand rather than a dismissal.


NEW WESTMINSTER
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: further supplementary: I asked the minister some two weeks ago about the recommendation of a jury that there be an investigation into conditions in the New Westminster penitentiary. He said at that time that the superintendent of penitentiaries was in the west and that he might be able to reply when the minister had his report on his return. I wonder whether the minister has had any report from the superintendent or the commissioner and what action the government intends to take.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I was under the impression that that matter was closed. I had the report from the judge and I gave the house the recommendation made by the judge. Those recommendations have been discussed with the commissioner, and the commissioner has not made any statement other than that which I put on Hansard.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question. Do I understand from the Minister of Justice that he is refusing to conduct an inquiry into conditions at the New Westminster penitentiary, as recommended by the jury, merely because of the views expressed by the judge and the commissioner of penitentiaries?


Lionel Chevrier: No, Mr. Speaker, I do not think I said that, and I hope I did not leave that impression. I reported, as I indicated earlier, that I had discussed the question with the commissioner. I have received no report from the commissioner, and since I hope my estimates will come up this week, or certainly early next week, there will be an opportunity to discuss it then, when I shall be glad to give further information to the hon. member.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, while I am discussing this matter perhaps I can reply to a question asked by
Inquiries of the Ministry the hon. member for Bow River concerning the warrant issued against Banks. The answer to the question asked by him, with reference particularly to Banks' absence from the country, is as follows. I am informed by Mr. Jean Martineau, Q.C., special counsel, that there are no court rules in Quebec which prohibit an accused who has been charged with an offence and granted bail from leaving Canada during the time he is out on bail. The amount of the bail and the conditions to be imposed are matters for the court, and it is significant in this case that the court actually fixed bail in a lower sum than the crown suggested, thus confirming that the court brought its own judgment to bear upon this matter.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: supplementary question with reference to the answer of the Minister of Justice. Do I take his answer to mean that there are special rules governing bail in the province of Quebec which are not covered by the Criminal Code of Canada?


Lionel Chevrier: All I can say in that respect is that the moment the matter is in the hands of the courts, then it is no longer the responsibility, I take it, of those who have laid the charge or are responsible for the laying of the charge. That, I think, applies not only in the province of Quebec but in all other provinces as well. The accused is then in the hands of the court. If the court decides to place conditions upon bail, over which certainly neither the Minister of Justice nor any officer in the department would have any control, I do not think one should direct any criticism at that court.



CANADIAN FLAG


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Real Caoueile (Villeneuve):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister. As the present session is coming to an end and as we will soon be celebrating Christmas, at which time it is customary to exchange presents with one another, would the Prime Minister be willing to give a Christmas present to the Canadian people by granting our country a distinctive national flag?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I think it will be impossible to have this gift ready and wrapped before Christmas.

Inquiries of the Ministry ECONOMIC COUNCIL



INQUIRY AS TO APPOINTMENT OF PERSONNEL

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the President of the Privy Council when he intends to announce the personnel of the economic council of Canada? I know the chairman and directors have been appointed, as well as some staff. It is now over four months since the legislation was passed, and this matter was supposed to be of very important urgency. So far as I know the government has not yet announced the personnel.


Maurice Lamontagne: Mr. Speaker, I hope to be in a position to make an announcement about this next week.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Is it his intention to hold soon a special meeting between the federal and the provincial governments in order to discuss exclusively the unemployment problem which is alarming Canada at the present time?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: The question of unemployment was discussed recently at the federal-provincial conference, at which time there was noted by those present an encouraging rise in total employment in Canada and an encouraging decline in unemployment. As the hon. member will realize from the figures released today, the unemployment rate, seasonally adjusted, is lower at the present time than it has been since the summer of 1957.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: That noise is a form of closure, Mr. Speaker. I wish to ask a supplementary question. In view of the fact that this winter half a million Canadians will be unemployed, is it the intention of the minister to recommend the holding of a special meeting between the federal government and the provincial governments to consider this important matter?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: As I have indicated, the premiers were given an opportunity, pursuant to a meeting in Halifax this summer, to


have a special conference with the federal government on unemployment. Most of them preferred to have the item listed on the agenda of the recent federal-provincial conference. This was done, and an additional discussion was held at that time with respect to unemployment.


John George Diefenbaker: I was interested in the cavalier way in which the minister disposed of the matter of unemployment. Does he regard the situation today, when there are
300,000	unemployed, as being the full employment which the Liberal party promised?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: The situation of any person who is unemployed and who is willing and able to work is a matter of serious concern to the government, and to all Canadians. I wish to assure the right hon. gentleman that this is the attitude taken on the part of the government. I wish to assure him also that there has been a definite increase in employment during the past year and a definite decrease in unemployment, and that the unemployment rate, seasonally adjusted, is the lowest since the summer of 1957.


Hon. Theogene Ricard (St. Hyacinlhe-Ba-got):: I should like to ask the Minister of Labour what projects he has in mind to provide jobs for these 303,000 Canadians who are unemployed. What are his proposals for providing immediate work for these people? I ask this because when the hon. gentleman was on this side of the house he certainly made a big story out of it.


Mr. G. H. Aiken (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: I should like to ask the Minister of Labour if he does not agree that the decline in unemployment is the result of the legislation enacted over the last few years.


Raymond Langlois: A supplementary question to the Minister of Labour with reference to the answer he gave to the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Mont-calm. Is the minister aware that the residents in the area of Thetford Mines would pay his fare there if he would go there and explain to them what he has just said in this house, in the way he said it?


Robert Muir: Could I ask the minister what plans he has for those who will be displaced by the closing of the Point Edward naval base? If he is not able to reply now, then how soon will these plans be announced?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I would refer the hon. member to the statement made by my colleague the Minister of National Defence with respect to this matter-a statement which I hope he drew to the attention of the people

of Cape Breton on his visit there last week end-to the effect that no reduction in the work force at that base would be undertaken until after April 1, that the reduction would be undertaken over a considerable period of time, and that appropriate measures would be taken to assist in the adjustment of those affected.


Robert Muir: In other words, what the minister is saying-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. This is becoming a debate.


Robert Muir: Am I to understand from the minister's last statement that no one will be laid off at the Point Edward naval base until his department finds alternative work for them?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: The statements which the Minister of National Defence and I have made on this point are perfectly clear.


Robert Muir: I do not think they are clear to those who will be laid off.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jack A. Irvine (London):: May I direct a question to the Minister of Labour? Will the minister inform the house what progress has been made in preparing legislation to overhaul the Unemployment Insurance Act?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. That is certainly a question for the order paper at this time of the day.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


John Whitney Pickersgill: the third reading of Bill No. C-121, respecting the appointment of auditors for national railways.


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


An hon. Member:: On division.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Lamoureux in the chair.



PRIVY COUNCIL

[Stage Direction]
1. Payment, notwithstanding anything in the Financial Administration Act or the Senate and House of Commons Act respecting the independence
Supply-Privy Council of parliament, to each member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada who is a minister for whom no salary or allowance in addition to the allowances under section 33 and section 44 of the Senate and House of Commons Act is provided (the acceptance of which shall not render such member ineligible or disqualify him as a member of the House of Commons) of a salary of $7,500 per annum and pro rata for any period less than a year, $7,500.
Maurice Lamontagne: There are a number of different subjects which might properly be discussed as we consider the estimates of the privy council. So as to have a more orderly discussion, I propose to hon. members that we defer consideration of the estimates of the emergency measures organization until the very end of our deliberations. At that time, the Minister of Industry, who is now responsible for this organization, will take over. I would also suggest that the general discussion on centennial projects and programs be postponed until we reach the vote concerning the centennial administration. If this procedure is acceptable-and I hope it will be, for it will make for a much more orderly discussion, as I have suggested-it would perhaps be convenient for me to say a few words at this point, about the bureau of government organization which forms part of the privy council office and about the progress that has been achieved in implementing the recommendations of the royal commission on government organization, generally referred to as the Glassco commission.
The first volume of the reports of the commission appeared in September, 1962. Since then four additional volumes have been published. Volume 5 appeared in May of this year. The commission has now discharged its mandate. Its staff of experts and consultants, combined with officers seconded to it from within the public service, has now been disbanded.
I should like to take advantage of the opportunity presented by this discussion of the estimates to express the thanks of the government and of the people of Canada to the commissioners and to all those who were associated with them in their monumental study of the structure and organization of the government of Canada in all its many forms. The present government holds the view that the findings and the recommendations of the commissioners deserve the most serious and careful study.
There is, in the view of the government, much in the report of the commissioners that will, if carried into effect, achieve one of the commission's prime objectives as stated in its terms of reference, namely "to provide efficiency, economy and improved service in the dispatch of public business". At the same

Supply-Privy Council time, it must be added that there will inevitably be some recommendations which can only be accepted and implemented with suitable modifications, and others which may not be acceptable at all.
It was for the purpose of facilitating the detailed study and appraisal of the commission's numerous recommendations, about 300 in all, that the bureau of government organization was established by the preceding administration in the privy council office. The bureau was established in January of this year just prior to the publication of volume 3 of the commission's reports. It has continued to function actively throughout the year and the first major results of its work were seen in the list of 68 approved recommendations which I tabled in the house on November 5 last. If we add to this list the half dozen or more recommendations formally accepted and approved by the previous administration we can say that something like 25 per cent of the formal recommendations made by the Glassco commission in its five volumes, containing 24 reports, have now been formally approved by the government.
I should add immediately with reference to the statement I have just made that I recognize the impossibility of judging the progress made in implementing the commission's findings simply by reference to the percentage of recommendations that have been approved. The 75 or more formal recommendations which have been accepted to date are not in all cases to be considered among the most important of the commission's recommendations. Many of the more fundamental and far reaching proposals still remain to be assessed and decided. Indeed, many of the most important proposals of the commission are not set out as formal recommendations at all. Instead they are embodied in the text of the reports themselves, not as formal recommendations but explicitly or implicitly as part of the argument of the commissioners. I cite as instances of my point report No. 1 entitled, "A Plan For Management", the separate report of commissioner Therrien on bilingualism in the public service, and report No. 19 on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Not one of these three reports contains a single formal recommendation. One has to look to the text of the reports themselves and to the argument advanced in the text to determine what criticisms are offered concerning the present arrangements and what changes, by inference if not directly, are advocated.
This is why I say that the findings of the commissioners, both their formal recommendations and the implications of their criticisms and their observations on a wide variety of governmental activities, must be studied actively and with the greatest care in order
[Mr. Lamontaene.l

to determine the full implications of the changes which are proposed in the interests of improved and more effective service to the taxpaying public.
I should like now to direct the committee's attention to a number of major questions of principle to which the Glassco commission addressed itself, since it is only by so doing that we will be able to place in proper perspective the recommendations which the commissioners made and which the government has been considering. Perhaps the most important of these general questions has to do with the degree of concentration or delegation of authority that is to be sought in a service as large, as varied and as far-flung as is the federal public service. By its very nature the federal administration must be widely dispersed and highly decentralized in physical and geographical terms. That is not only highly desirable but entirely unavoidable in a country as vast as Canada.
We have also accepted in our governmental structure over the years a high degree of decentralization by departments and agencies. The proof of this is seen in the number of departments which have been created over the years and in the even larger number of independent and quasi-independent agencies, including crown corporations, which have been established by parliamentary action both in the pre-war and especially in the post-war years.
In another sense, however, with respect to authority for decision making there has been a lesser degree of decentralization than one might imagine if one were to judge solely by the appearances of geographical and departmental decentralization as applied to operations. So far as the basic authority and responsibility with respect to financial and personnel management are concerned, these have not been decentralized with respect to departments to anything like the same extent that they have been in the case of crown corporations or other agencies. For a good many years now, since 1918 or earlier in respect of personnel matters and since 1932 in respect of financial agencies, the civil service commission, the treasury board and the comptroller of the treasury have exercised detailed control over the personnel and financial activities of individual departments to an extent far beyond that which the Glassco commission considers necessary for the effective operations of the departments or for the proper safeguarding of the public interest.
The commissioners point out, for example, that under the provisions of the Civil Service Act it is the civil service commission which recruits, selects, promotes, transfers and

carries out most of the other important elements of the personnel function affecting the careers of the classified civil servant in a government department. It is the civil service commission, together with the treasury board, which deals with matters affecting establishments, classifications and reclassifications. It is the treasury board which in the final analysis deals with pay determination. In fact, very few of the decisions in the personnel field affecting the work performance, the careers and the effective deployment of the members of the civil service can legally be taken by the departments which, nominally at least, employ, direct and supervise the civil servants whose services they use to discharge the department's responsibilities.
The reasons which have led to the concentration of authority and responsibility in respect of personnel matters in the hands of the civil service commission and in the treasury board are of course well known, and have their roots in the early history of government in this country. While recognizing these historical factors, the Glassco commission concludes none the less that the removal of authority, responsibility and accountability from departments for personnel management has gone too far; that the departments have become weakened thereby; and that this has led to a degree of dependence by departments on the central control agencies, which is not healthy or conducive to sound concepts of organization or management. Where responsibility is too widely dispersed-where it is scattered, fragmented and shared by too many units of administration-it becomes almost impossible to fix or to pinpoint responsibility. By the same token it becomes more difficult to hold any one unit or authority accountable for the consequences of decisions which are taken.
The Glassco commission compares the position of the government departments and of the civil service in this respect, with the much greater concentration of authority, responsibility and accountability on line management that is found in private industry, and equally in the crown corporations and independent agencies. The commissioners ask, in this connection, what is so different about the position of 133,000 classified civil servants -and about the calibre and quality of departmental management-that they have to be treated so differently from employees in private industry, and so differently also from the much larger numbers of crown employees employed outside the confines of the Civil Service Act?
The conclusion of the commissioners is that the high degree of detailed and centralized control over individual personnel management decisions presently exercised by the
Supply-Privy Council civil service commission and by the treasury board is both unnecessary, and in fact detrimental to efficient administration. It recommends that central control continue to be exercised through the laying down of broad policies, directives, principles and guide lines through the treasury board; that the role of the civil service commission be substantially altered with the removal of many aspects of personnel administration from its jurisdiction and a strengthening of its role as an independent agency for the safeguarding of the merit system; and that departments be given greater responsibility for making the detailed individual personnel decisions affecting the employees of their respective departments, but always within the policy guide lines established by the central management authority, that is, the treasury board.
When we turn to the area of financial management, and to the relationship between the comptroller of the treasury and the treasury board with departmental managements, the commissioners present to us a similar picture. Under the Financial Administration Act the comptroller of the treasury must pre-audit every proposed payment of every department of government. Should the comptroller's view of the legality of the proposed payment, or of the eligibility of the proposed payee to receive the payment conflict with the view of the administering department, such disagreement can only be resolved by the decision of the treasury board. Such a system involves, in the view of the commissioners, an undesirable degree of protection, leading to dependence on the comptroller, for departments; inevitable duplication between the work of departments which must make the initial decision, and the comptroller, who must confirm or reject it; and excessive involvement of the treasury board in a large number of individual decisions when its primary concern and preoccupation should be with broad policy matters.
The full measure of the extent to which the responsibility for decision making has been shifted from departmental management to the central management authority of the treasury board can be seen from the table shown on page 131 of volume 1 of the Glassco report, which shows that in 1960 almost
16,000	submissions were made by departments and agencies to the treasury board seeking authority to make decisions. The number of management decisions, initiated by departments in the personnel field, or in the proposed authorization of money payments which require the sanction of the civil service commission or the comptroller of the treasury, is vastly in excess of the questions submitted for decision to the treasury board

Supply-Privy Council itself. In all three areas, the view of the Glassco commission is that the vast majority of these individual decisions on detailed points can and should be taken by departmental management within the framework of broad policy guide lines established by the treasury board or other central control agencies. In other words, the central control agencies should exercise control through policy formulation, and through a method of supervision which endeavours to assess the over-all effectiveness with which policies are carried out. If this viewpoint is accepted, it means in the view of the commissioners that the central control agencies concentrate on policy formulation, and disengage from detailed decision making with which they are so greatly overburdened at the present time. Departments, on the other hand, within the framework of the policies laid down for them to follow, would have the responsibility for making their own decisions, would not be excessively protected from the consequences of their own carelessness and mistakes as they are at present, and would be held accountable for the results, whether good or bad, which flow from their decisions.
At this point, the question can quite properly be asked: what is the government's attitude to the commission's point of view on this important question of financial management and control? Does the government subscribe to the philosophy of personnel and financial management outlined in the Glassco report?
The answer to this perfectly proper question must, of course, be a qualified one. By and large, however, the government's view on the score of financial management is indicated by the fact that it has accepted, in the list which I tabled on November 5 last, the recommendation set out at page 105 in volume 1, of the report that "departments and agencies be given a greater measure of financial authority and be held correspondingly accountable for the effective management of the financial resources placed at their disposal."
I should perhaps draw attention to an important difference between the recommendation as it appears in the commission's report and the form in which I have indicated the government's acceptance.
The report refers to departments being given "the necessary financial authority"; the recommendation as accepted by the government calls for departments to be given a greater measure of financial authority. This distinction is an important one. The government, in other words, is accepting and moving in the direction which the commission has recommended, that is to say, the direction of
IMr. Lamontagne.]
greater departmental management control, responsibility and accountability for its own administration.
The government has not yet, however, made a final determination as to how far it is prepared to go along the lines recommended by Glassco, nor is it prepared as yet to say that it will go the entire distance advocated by the commission. That is why it has to date indicated its acceptance of only 16 of the 27 recommendations contained in the financial management report. The remaining 11 have not been rejected; they have merely been reserved for more detailed study.
I should perhaps at this point refer to another step which we have decided to take in the process of testing the validity of the Glassco commission's recommendations on financial management in advance of their actual implementation. Members of the public accounts committee have already been advised of a number of feasibility studies which have been arranged to test the applicability of the commission's recommendations on financial management in the day to day administration of four separate departments. The departments engaged in these feasibility studies are the departments of agriculture, northern affairs and national resources, transport, and veterans affairs. In the case of northern affairs the study extends beyond questions of financial management to include the Glassco recommendations on personnel management and paperwork and systems management as well. Each of these four departments has retained the services of a management consultant to assist in working out the changes in departmental organization structure and procedures which would be required to implement fully all the Glassco recommendations in the fields mentioned.
These studies, which will take six months to complete, will cover not only the recommendations in the fields of financial management which the government has already accepted, but also those which have not as yet been decided. We hope and expect that out of the experience of these four departments we will be able to determine the extent to which it is sound and practicable to apply the commission's recommendations on financial and personnel management, etc., to the service as a whole.
My remarks to this point, Mr. Chairman, have related principally to the recommendations contained in the first volume of the Glassco commission's reports. Here the principal issue has been the division of responsibility between the central control agencies, treasury board, the civil service commission and the comptroller of the treasury on the one hand, and the departments on the other.

The commission comes down in favour of a substantial shift of management responsibilities on matters of detail to the departments.
There is one other issue of major importance raised by the commissioners in their very first report entitled "A Plan for Management". That has to do with the proposed relocation and reconstitution of treasury board, and the designation of a minister as the full-time president of treasury board. The principal reason advanced for this proposal by the commission is that the Minister of Finance, because of his other preoccupations and responsibilities has, in fact been unable for a number of years now to devote an adequate amount of time and attention to his duties as the chairman of treasury board. The commission expresses the view that if the trends of recent years continue there will be an increasing danger that the really effective control of treasury board decisions will come to rest increasingly with the staff of treasury board rather than with the ministers who make up treasury board itself. The commission therefore recommends that a full-time minister be named to preside over the work of the board, that the board itself be recognized effectively in its constitutional role as a committee of the privy council, and that in conformity with this concept of its role the staff of the board be reconstituted as an integral part of the privy council office, instead of the Department of Finance to which it presently belongs.
It is clear that this recommendation of the commission is one of fundamental importance to the future role and function of treasury board, and to the discharge of its responsibilities as the central management authority of the government itself. The existing arrangement whereby the Minister of Finance serves also as chairman of treasury board goes back to early days of confederation. The committee can be assured that the government is giving the most careful consideration to these important recommendations of the commission, but it may be some weeks yet before it is in a position to announce a definite decision one way or the other.
I have concentrated my remarks in large part, Mr. Chairman, on the reports contained in volume 1 of the commission's work, partly because we have had a longer period of time in which to study these reports, but more importantly because they deal with principles and problems which affect the functioning of the public service as a whole. I expect that within the next few months we will complete very largely our consideration of the important issues raised by the reports contained in volume 1, and that by the time
Supply-Privy Council this committee is called upon to consider the 1964-65 estimates of the bureau of government organization I will be in a position to present to the committee a report on the government's decisions with respect to the questions still outstanding. As the work on volume 1 approaches completion, we are turning our attention increasingly to the reports contained in the later volumes. The list of approved recommendations which I tabled on November 5 covers, in fact, a variety of matters contained in volumes 2 and 3, but does not touch volumes 4 and 5. These later reports are now receiving our detailed attention.
I should like to mention a particular group of recommendations, relating to report No. 6 on purchasing and supply, which the government has already announced its intention to implement. These recommendations call for the conversion of the Department of Defence Production into a department of supply, which will serve as the central procurement agency for most, if not all, departments and agencies of the federal government. As the committee knows, the Department of Defence Production already acts as the procurement agency for the defence department and the armed forces, whose combined requirements exceed by two or three times, in dollar value, all the procurement requirements of all the civilian departments and agencies of the government. The logic of the recommendation to establish a common procurement agency is therefore difficult to argue against. The Department of Defence Production has therefore been authorized to proceed by orderly stages, to the establishment of a central procurement agency to serve the common needs of all departments and functions of the federal government.
The first stage of this will consist of-


The Chairman:: I am sorry, but I must interrupt the minister since his time has expired.

Unless he has the unanimous consent of the committee-


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Maurice Lamontagne: The first stage of this will consist of taking over certain common procurement functions previously assigned to the Queen's printer, office equipment and supplies; the Department of Public Works, office furniture; and the Canadian Commercial Corporation, procurement for other governments. When this stage has been satisfactorily completed, the transfer of common procurement from the various departments and agencies, which now carry out their own purchasing and supply activities, will then be undertaken.

Supply-Privy Council Some commentators on the work of the Glassco commission have contended that the purchasing and supply recommendations, and others, contained in other reports throughout the second and subsequent volume, run directly counter to the principal recommendations contained in volume 1. Volume 1 would decentralize authority and control for detailed decision-making to departments. Volume 2 in the report on purchasing and supply would take the procurement function from the departments and centralize it in a common procurement agency. Is there a contradiction here? In the view of the government there is no contradiction. Under the arrangements proposed, the procurement authority and control will continue to rest with the individual departments and agencies. The departments will continue to decide what they need, what specifications should be laid down, what quantity and quality should be stipulated, what requisitions should issue, and so on. The departments, after all, are the ones which will be accountable for the expenditures of the funds voted by parliament. The new department of supply, on the other hand, will act solely as the agent of the requisitioning department, in a service not in a control capacity. It will be the task of the treasury board, as the central management agency of the government and the over-all policy making authority in this field, to ensure that the individual departments and agencies conform to the government's broad policy directives in the requisitions which they issue for the central procurement agency to fill. The control or supervision of departmental action will in no way be a function of the central procurement agency. If this principle is maintained, there will clearly be no conflict between the principles advocated by the commission and adopted by the government with respect to central procurement and those which favour a larger measure of departmental responsibility as set out in volume 1. [Translation]
Mr. Chairman, my last remarks on the recommendations of the Glassco commission, are related to the problem of bilingualism in the civil service. The commission submitted, in that field, five recommendations which have already been approved by the government and which we are now implementing.
Here are these recommendations:
1.	That the federal government adopt active measures to develop bilingual capacities among its employees on a selective basis.
2.	That the government intensify its efforts to attract and retain more of the highly-qualified young people of French Canada capable of advancement to senior ranks.


3.	That consideration be given to a review of the classification, remuneration, and career opportunities for translators throughout the public service.
4.	That steps be taken to attract more bilingual information officers to the public service.
5.	That, in every department and agency, full bilingualism be made a mandatory qualification for at least one of the top positions in the information service unit.
I must stress the fact that these recommendations are formal proposals, emanating from the commission as a body. They are not part of the minority report of Mr. Therrien, that I have already mentioned. Although Mr. Therrien in his report does not make any formal recommendations, he makes some very important and useful remarks on the subject of bilingualism in the federal administration. Mr. Therrien has explained most clearly the various aspects of a situation which has always existed but with which we cannot put up. We all know that it has to be corrected, improved.
It is partly for that reason that the government decided to set up a royal commission of inquiry on bilingualism and bicul-turalism.
However, the federal government felt that it should not wait for the commission's report to act. As early as last May, a special cabinet committee was established to look after administrative reform and bilingualism. I have the honour of being its chairman. As its first task, the committee has decided to define more clearly the objectives of the government regarding federal administration.
We have set ourselves the three following aims:
1.	To put in theory and practice, French and English on an equal footing for all public relations of the federal authorities. In practice, for external written or oral communications, the preference of the citizen would determine the language to be used.
2.	To establish a similar policy concerning internal communications within the civil service. Thus, correspondence and other written communications could be in English or in French, according to the writer's choice. A similar system should finally be set up for oral communications. Handbooks, general instructions and circulars would be published in both languages.
3.	To intensify the efforts being made to recruit a greater number of civil servants from French Canada and, to this end, to revise if need be, the competition system and recruiting methods.
In order to assist the government in reaching those objectives, an interdepartmental committee made up of officials representing the main departments and the crown corporations has also been established. This committee has been given the task of submitting

as soon as possible concrete recommendations on the following aspects of a general program.
1.	The nature and organization of French and English classes within the public service, for government officials as well as for other employees. The committee has already submitted a report on the matter and the government has approved a plan which is to be carried out, on an experimental basis, by the civil service commission and which will be used to determine the contents of a comprehensive program we expect to launch in 1964.
2.	The suitable measures to adopt to recruiting, training, promotion and assignment of employees, so as to better meet the requirements of bilingualism within the public service.
3.	The payment of an additional salary as a reward for the additional competence required from the civil servants who have to do business in both languages.
4.	The setting up, in each department, of a section concerned with the progress and coordination of the measures intended to ensure bilingualism.
5.	The setting up, location and structure of a federal institute where civil servants would study especially the problems relating to bilingualism and biculturalism.
6.	The use of bilingual forms, manuals and circulars in all departments and crown corporations.
7.	Bilingualism within our armed forces.
Of course the government reserves the right
to accept, amend or reject the recommendations made by the interdepartmental committee.
Moreover, we do not intend to impose that over-all program by force. We believe, on the contrary, that it would fail without full and wholehearted support from civil servants and their associations.
That is why the government intends to consult with these associations before taking each important step in that program. We want above all to avoid affecting acquired rights and creating new discriminatory conditions while trying to rectify the injustices that exist at the present time.
It must be added that many civil servants have already understood the new tasks which force themselves upon them and, in many cases, they have themselves taken the initiative by attending special classes, devoting part of their leisure time and their own money to that purpose. We are then convinced that civil servants will accept the government program concerning bilingualism, not reluctantly and as a concession but as an opportunity to improve their own culture and thence be able to serve all Canadians more effectively.
Supply-Privy Council


George Clyde Nowlan: Mr. Chairman, I am sure the committee appreciates the statement which the minister has just given to us. It was one of some length, and I do not say that critically at all. The subject matter deserves to be treated at some length. This is the first really definite statement on the administration of his department, with particular reference to the report of the Glassco commission. I appreciate the fact that the minister has dealt at some considerable length with the report of the Glassco commission. He dealt also with the matters of bilingualism and biculturalism, which is a very important matter. I am sure the minister and the committee will appreciate the fact I do not dwell on that at any length at all because I think we agree, in general, with what he has said. However, for a few brief moments I want to deal with his references to the Glassco commission.
I can appreciate the problems which are confronting the government, and particularly confronting the minister, because, as I understand it, the minister is charged primarily with the responsibility of developing this situation. I appreciate what he says about the chairman of the treasury board. It is true that constitutionally the Minister of Finance is the chairman of treasury board, or at least is responsible for its administration. I doubt whether that practice has been carried out to the letter for some years. I do not think I am betraying any state secrets when I say that during the time when I was minister of national revenue, in fact before the government changed in 1957, I was informed, when Mr. Abbott was minister of finance, that the minister of national revenue acted as chairman of treasury board, or was acting chairman of treasury board. During the time when my colleague Mr. Fleming was minister of finance, I very often, in fact usually, acted as chairman of treasury board; and when I became minister of finance I had another colleague take over the same responsibilities. Because it is absolutely impossible, of course, for a minister of finance to look after the details of matters which come before treasury board.
I think we are very fortunate in having had this report of the Glassco commission which points out the detailed administration which vests in treasury board today. With all respect to a most distinguished and able group of civil servants-no government could be better served-it is very difficult indeed for treasury board to deal adequately with these problems which confront them. I have been sitting in the public accounts committee during the last few days listening to discussion by hon. members about investigating tenders and other matters which come

Supply-Privy Council before treasury board. I have felt from listening to these hon. members that they did not realize that every week hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of these matters come before treasury board and have to be dealt with on the recommendations of the officials. It is impossible for the Minister of Finance or the Minister of National Revenue or for anyone-I understand that under the present government a colleague of the Minister of Finance acts as chairman most of the time- to deal with these problems. Therefore I appreciate the fact that the minister has dealt at some length today with his thinking with respect to the report of the Glassco commission.
I know very well that in the relatively short time which he has had at his disposal it is impossible for him to make definitive recommendations to the committee. I quite appreciate the fact that he will need some weeks, perhaps some months, longer to deal with the question. Perhaps I am pessimistic enough to think that he will have another three or four months in which to deal with these matters, and that when he brings his estimates before the committee of supply, which will have to be fairly early if he is going to deal with them, say in the early spring of next year, we will expect the minister to bring forward, as I am sure he is planning to do, positive recommendations or statements of policy as to how far he or the government proposes to go in implementing the Glassco commission report.
I know that the government of which I was a member was impressed with many of the recommendations in the report. We did not endorse them all, but I think there are matters there which are worthy of debate and should be considered very carefully before they are adopted. We did second to the privy council several civil servants, two of whom were particularly able; the deputy minister of a department who had had wide administrative experience and in whom I am sure every member of the House of Commons and member of this committee has complete confidence, and a Mr. McDonald, who had been a member of the treasury board, who co-operated with him. I am sure the minister is having the assistance of these senior civil servants, as well as undoubtedly many others in formulating his plans.
Without taking up too much time just now, because frankly one could talk about this matter for two hours and end up with the same situation-that there has not been time for the minister or the government to arrive at definite conclusions as to what they propose to do in this matter-may I just say that I think it is highly important that something should be done. I think the report is very


valuable. 1 hope and believe that the minister also feels there are many recommendations deserving of support which will result in economies in an area in which economies are very difficult to achieve; hence any avenue which leads to economies should be explored in every way.
I do not think I can usefully add anything more at this moment to what I have already said on the other question of bilingualism and biculturalism. This is a problem which has been with us for many years. I know the government is dealing or is intending to deal with it, and I am sure the committee and the House of Commons will support the government in every reasonable step they think necessary to develop the matter. So far as the Glassco commission is concerned I leave the report on the desk of the minister who is responsible for it, and look forward, as I said not later than the last of February or very early in March, to the recommendations which the minister will bring forward; otherwise it might be left on my desk, and I would rather have his recommendations to deal with at the moment than my own.


Mr. Webster:: 
Mr. Marcoux:: Mr. Chairman, a short while ago I met the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Lamontagne) and I told him that as far as I am concerned I would not delay the adoption of his estimates, because I was not supposed to speak. However, since the spokesman of our party is not in the house at this moment, I will therefore say a few words in his place.
I believe that we should congratulate the government for its goodwill shown in the two fields mentioned by the President of the Privy Council. He referred to the report, or reports of the Glassco commission. Although with some reservations, he has nevertheless proved that the government favours the implementation of certain parts of the report and a more detailed consideration of some others. It seems to be sincerely interested in the Glassco report.
The government ought to be commended in that connection. I believe our group would agree with me when I say that it is a step in the right direction, that of justice and equity.
The minister also referred to the Therrien minority report. There again, I feel that Mr. Therrien did well in submitting such a report even though he did not suggest any corrective measure. I have the impression that the government and the President of the Privy Council will do their utmost to find a solution to the problems set out by Mr. Therrien.
It is a well-known fact that the government intends to favour bilingualism, and I say that it deserves to be congratulated for the projects which the minister has announced in that respect.
It should be kept in mind that, according to the proverb or saying, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Further steps are required and a definite stand should certainly be taken to cope with those problems.
I must admit that this problem is extremely complicated and that the Laurendeau-Dunton royal commission will not succeed in solving it. An answer will only be found with the good will of every individual, of parliament and, on a larger scale, of the Canadian people. It is only through understanding that we shall finally find a proper solution.
As for me, I am not interested in knowing the whys and wherefores of such situations

Supply-Privy Council within some department or agency in which we have only one representative out of a hundred. That is a thing of the past; what we are interested in now, is proportionate representation within each and every department.
I am not one of those either who insist on French Canadian representation on the basis of language regardless of competence. Indeed, I hold the same opinion about patronage. In my opinion, it is not because a person belongs to one party rather than another that he has the necessary qualifications. He must have specific qualifications and be competent.
In that connection, I feel that bilingual French Canadian candidates must be just as competent as the others, but they must also have an equal chance. It still happens that some people are not given an equal chance, and that is why I say that the question is difficult and delicate.
I shall stop here because I should not want to delay the adoption of these estimates.
There is a great deal of talk about national unity, the union of our two nations. Indeed, several expressions are used in that respect. To prevent any ambiguity, we should speak of the good will which should exist between the various groups which form our country. However, we should recognize the fact that the two groups which founded Canada have certain rights and responsibilities of which immigrants should be aware before they come over here.
As far as culture is concerned, I do not admit that it must divide us; on the contrary, it must unite us and give us a better understanding of each other. Thus, through our various cultures rather than our languages, I am of the opinion that we should look for things we have in common, which would help us to agree instead of disagree.
I express the wish, since there is often talk of bilingualism, that the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Lamontagne) will see to it that this commission will really give us an idea of the reasons why we find ourselves in such a situation today and let us know if there is a way out.
Before closing, I would like to add that my fellow citizens in Quebec with whom I am often in contact and to whom I offer applications to join the civil service, tell me: We do not want to go to Ottawa, we do not want to work for a federal department, we do not want to take a cut in salary in Ottawa when we can do better elsewhere.
Those are important problems and if we are aware of them, it will help us change an established situation of which we are conscious and about which even the royal commission will not give us much information.
Before closing, I would like to mention in connection with estimates Nos. 45, 50, 55 and


60 that the minister will have to change, I presume, the titles of those items which now read as follows: "National centennial" and "National conference on Canada's centennial", which will later be amended to read as follows: "Centennial of Canadian confederation" and "National conference on the centennial of confederation", under the terms of Bill No. C-107.


Georges-J. Valade: Would the hon. member allow me a question?
In the very beginning of his remarks, he congratulated the government for having implemented the representations of the Glassco report. Should he not congratulate the former government for having established that commission?


Guy Marcoux: Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned a moment ago, the intentions were good, and they should be congratulated. The Conservative government has established a number of commissions, but they did not always implement the recommendations which they made. It is one thing to establish commissions, but we must congratulate as well those who implement their suggestions.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Chairman, I would like to say only a few words on the estimates of the President of the Privy Council which will amount this year to $16,239,800, that is an increase of $9,096,990 compared to last year. This increase is mainly due to the fact that this year the government has approved payments to the fund of the centennial of confederation which will be celebrated in 1967, as well as to some government or semigovernment commissions making investigations here and there in Canada.
Mention has been made awhile ago of the role of the Glassco report and other commission reports. Liberals and Conservatives congratulated one another, the latter for having created these commissions and the former for having proceeded with them.
In my opinion, it is the first year that the Department of National Defence, which still has supplies accumulated in wartime, takes into consideration parts of the Glassco report, because there were extravagances and unreasonable expenses, which could have been eliminated. That is why I said the other day, during the study of the estimates of other departments, namely industry and trade and commerce, which want to promote industrialization all over Canada, that the reports of the Glassco commission, as well as all commissions, are terribly costly and did not produce much up to the present. The facts have been placed before us, but

it seems somewhat difficult for the government to take action now. We approve the estimates, for instance those under vote 50 entitled:
Programs and projects of national significance including grants towards such programs and projects.
As well as vote 55:
Payment to the national centennial fund-
-or the confederation centennial fund-
-to enable grants to be made to the provinces for local projects of a lasting nature (the total of such grants not to exceed $1 per capita of population per province).
This means that Ontario will receive a total of $6 million, Quebec, $5 million, Alberta, $1.5 million, British Columbia, $2 million, etc.
The President of the Privy Council is surely within his rights and, in my opinion, nobody in the house will object to the approval of his estimates which will enable us to celebrate properly the centennial of confederation.
We do not object to his estimates but we want to draw the minister's attention to the amounts allocated to various commissions. There have been many such commissions in the past under the Mackenzie King administration; there were some also under the Tory administration after 1957 and similar commissions will again be created to investigate the expenditures of various departments in the future.
Our commissions spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide a report and then they are not carried out, steps are not taken to correct situations which need to be corrected. I hope the government will seek a remedy for those situations which need it and will not hesitate in assuming the necessary responsibilities.
We, on this side of the house, will certainly co-operate with the President of the Privy Council to help him, as far as possible, to carry out the work that every representative of the people should have his heart set on, because the President of the Privy Council will certainly agree that government moneys must be spent in the best interests of the Canadian nation.


Mr. Macquarrie:: Mr. Chairman, I always try to speak briefly and I am already so overwhelmed with the yuletide spirit that this will guarantee ever greater brevity. In addition, I was back to my constituency yesterday and I was accorded such a good reception there that I am more anxious than ever to return so I would not want to carry on at any great length on these estimates.
I should like to say that I too appreciate the statement of the minister in respect of
Supply-Privy Council
the possible implementation of the Glassco royal commission recommendations. We on this side of the house are very proud of the initiative taken in this regard. We are happy about the prospect that those now in power -I was going to say "temporarily in power" -will look kindly upon the very practical suggestions put forward after this careful and exhaustive study.
I think it is tremendously important that we take some steps to bring about greater efficiency in the governmental service and, indeed, in the whole parliamentary process. Down through the ages it has been easy, of course, for those who set efficiency as their god to describe the parliamentary process as slow, ineffective and ineffectual. When Robert Borden came to the parliament of Canada many years ago he thought that the waste of time was enormous and that the methods were most unbusinesslike; but when he left he had a greater regard for the parliamentarian than for the businessman type who, he said, very rarely made a good parliamentarian. He did, however, make one or two exceptions. At a time when there are so many who, quickly and casually and I am not looking in any particular direction for the moment, would denigrate our parliamentary institution, it is of the essence that we take such steps as will bring about greater efficiency without at any time losing the essential ingredient, which is the democratic, representative and responsible element that makes our parliamentary institution something far more important and far greater than any economic aggregation.
I was most impressed with the remarks of the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway, not only because many years ago I was a member of the Canadian teachers' federation and, after that, a faculty member of various Canadian universities, but because of the tremendous importance of the subject which he so well emphasized. I have recently come back from a visit to various universities in Canada and one cannot visit a Canadian university without being impressed with the tremendous needs, financial and otherwise, that face administrators, the tremendous problems that face those concerned about the education of our youth.
The representations of the Canadian teachers' federation and the Canadian university foundation must be met. I would call upon the government to find means to give more than an agreeable verbal response to these people-I am sure the government will find support in all parts of the house-in order to try to assist our educators in facing up to a problem which is as acute indeed as our need for national survival, and as important as our

Supply-Privy Council hopes for national greatness and advancement. I believe the minister has not always been overly kind toward the concept of shared programs. I come from one of those provinces which are never terribly concerned about joint ventures in which the dominion government participates. We have no worries about our provincial purity as long as we can find some means-


Maurice Lamontagne: As long as you get the money.


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: to assist in meeting the needs of our people. Therefore we welcome assistance. Indeed, we welcome it from this government just as heartily as we did from its predecessor, and in the field of education it is obvious this -would have to be a shared program of some kind, recognizing the fundamental and prime role of the provinces in this field.
I am not going to speak at length, and certainly I am not going to bring in any partisan asperities, but I would say that I very much hope the Prime Minister will move quickly on his pledges to the young people of Canada, the students, to bring into being a system of scholarships. I believe the promise was made a few months ago of 10,000 scholarships of $1,000 each, and of various plans for bursaries and other assistance in the form of loans. The need is great; the promise was made, and I think the government will find no opposition, no harassment, in its efforts to honour that promise and to assist the young people of Canada in attaining their educational goals.
I would like to say, too, I was most impressed with the remarks of the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency when he spoke about bilingualism. Naturally we have a bilingual parliament by law, and of course we must take note of the importance of regarding bilingualism as essential in that apparatus of parliament, and in the administration of government; but I would hope that in our efforts along those lines we would not move to a situation where the linguistic abilities of the citizen would transcend any other of his abilities or capacities. Therefore the remarks of the hon. member commend themselves to me very much for their soundness and, I think, for their validity.
I will not discuss the question of bicul-turalism and the royal commission, only to say I wish it well. I cannot anticipate too much in its accomplishments. It may help us outline and define the problem but it cannot come close to a solution, because problems so grave and so significant are not handed over to a royal commission to be resolved in the report thereof.

It seems to me that the people of Canada are most anxious in these very trying times that moderation and reason will prevail. We have the national centennial commission under the minister's department, and we hope the same spirit of common sense and reasonable accommodation will prevail today as it did nearly 100 years ago.
I was very proud that a colleague of mine, the hon. member for Three Rivers, in my view was the first man to utter in accents of 1963 the principles of Cartierism in that approach. I might tell the parliamentary secretary it is of another Cartier I speak. Jacques Cartier was a great man, but perhaps the latter one was an even greater man, Sir George Etienne Cartier, and his were the views so recently enunciated by the hon. member for Three Rivers. He is not the only one by any means, because this is the kind of rationale upon which we must base our consideration of bilingualism and bicul-turalism, although the purists may say the word biculture is not properly used.
Finally, before I sit down, I would like to commend the minister's attention to the activities soon to commence in the province of Prince Edward Island where we are putting on a real celebration, extending over 12 months, celebrating 100 years commemoration of the Charlottetown conference, where the whole confederation project began. I would not presume for a moment to say that we in Prince Edward Island can teach all of Canada how to conduct celebrations, but I would suggest that any Canadian who comes to these would learn a great deal. Therefore I would invite the minister and all others to become a part of the celebrations we will launch in a very few days to honour that historic event. I am quite sure the minister will still be the minister for a good portion of the celebrations, and who knows how much longer. I wish him well in his department.


Mr. Howe (Hamilton South):: I would like to speak about education, but in a much more limited way with regard to the rather serious problem that exists so far as the future of physicians in Canada is concerned. The education of physicians has become a very serious matter, much more serious than we realize, and in order to go into this subject I would like to preface it with three questions; (1) Are we producing enough physicians in Canada? (2) How does the quality of the physicians we produce compare with those produced in other countries? (3) What does the future hold.
The answer to the first question must be a categorical no. In the year 1901 Canada had one physician for every 972 persons. In the year 1951 there was one physician for 976

persons. Although our production of physicians from our own medical schools had increased during these years, it had not increased as rapidly as had the population of our country. Fortunately for us we were saved from a disastrous shortage of physicians during the past 10 years of rapid population growth by the large number of immigrant physicians who came to our country. The average output of our own 12 medical schools in Canada at the present time is about 850 new physicians a year. During some of the years since 1955 the immigrant physicians coming to our country have annually numbered over 600, thus increasing by approximately 75 per cent the number of physicians entering practice in Canada each year over what we produce ourselves. As a result of this, our physician population ratio has improved and in 1960 it was one to 879 population. It still is below that of 20 other countries in the world today, and far below the United States, which has one physician to 711 population.
Even if it were advantageous for Canadians to be looked after in significant part by physicians educated elsewhere, we cannot count on this source of supply to continue. Many of these immigrant physicians were the ones who were unhappy under some form of prepaid health insurance that existed in their own countries. As the years go by the number of malcontents becomes less, in part because physicians have been more inured to the new system, and in part because forms of prepaid health insurance in other countries have been improving as the difficulties in their early years of use have been smoothed out. Further, when Canada develops a form of government supported prepaid medical care itself, which most assuredly will happen, it will cease to be one of the few remaining centres of individual enterprise in the field of health.
Another factor which will make our supply of physicians still less adequate is the fact that when Canada does develop a form of government supported prepaid health insurance, there will be a significant increase in the demand for health services. In some other countries where this has been studied, the demand has increased by as much as 30 per cent. It is doubtful that the increase will be so great in Canada, because it seems likely that a larger proportion of our population is now receiving adequate medical care than in many other countries. However, there can be no doubt that there will be increased demand for physicians under any form of government supported health plan which is likely to come into effect in this country. Thus, at the moment when our demand for physician services will increase, we are likely to be 28902-5-364
Supply-Privy Council thrown back on our own inadequate resources for the education of this group.
Still another factor enters the situation. I shall not go into detail on this at the moment but will touch on it a little later. Medical education has been founded upon the fact that there are charity patients, and on these patients Canadian doctors have learned how to practise medicine. When health insurance is universal in Canada, charity patients will cease to exist. This will present a problem of the first magnitude in the training of physicians in this country. Under the circumstances, I hope you will agree with me that we are not educating a sufficient number of physicians.
The second question is: How does the quality of physicians produced in Canada compare with those produced in other countries? Teaching hospitals have been tremendously important in Canada's history. Apart from providing the medical student, the interne and the resident with patients over whom they could have certain responsibilities under supervision, they have been the locations in which clinical investigation has been centered. They have provided areas in which treatment methods could be evaluated under controlled circumstances. Their carefully selected physicians have been responsible for almost all the progress which has been made in medical care in this country. The physicians selected to serve on their staffs considered it to be an honour and the faculties of medicine had access to the services of these outstanding physicians for a part of each day for a tiny honorarium each year. Most of the patients in these units were charity patients from the community, referred in by the practising physician because such referral did not mean a loss of income. However, many others were the serious problem cases of the region requiring the excellent facilities and staffs provided. Truly the nerve centre of Canadian medicine has been the closed teaching units developed in our centres of medical education.
So medical education has progressed rapidly. That provided in Canada could compare favourably with that in any part of the world and as short a time as eight years ago Canadians had every reason to be proud of the physicians that were being produced in this country. However, since that time a whole series of events have entered the scene to make it difficult or impossible to maintain the standard which had been set previously. These I would like to enumerate.
First, forces have come into play which have tended to break down the strong union between the medical school and the teaching hospital. One of these forces has been a diminution in the number of charity patients

Supply-Privy Council and therefore a diminution in the interdependence of the two. As a result of the growth of voluntary prepaid medical plans large numbers of people are already covered for medical care. This is particularly true in the large centres of population wherein universities and medical schools are likely to be situated. Thus the number of charity patients to be referred to the teaching unit has diminished and in many schools in Canada a very real shortage of teaching patients is developing.
A second and more sudden influence has been the introduction of government supported hospitalization. In the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act made law on April 1, 1959, no mention was made of medical education. As a result, provincial hospital commissions have mostly taken the attitude that the additional costs of the teaching hospital, which previously had been supported by voluntary funds, were not a responsibility under the national hospital insurance agreement. Therefore, although every dollar required for the provision of routine care to the patient is provided in the main, no single penny is available for the added costs associated with medical education and with medical research. Further, the hospitals now being government supported are unable to continue their fund raising activities successfully. As a result, hospitals have not been able to continue to support medical education and medical research. The costs have been thrown back directly on the small and already strained budgets of the universities, and it is a fact that the universities have been subsidizing the national hospital insurance plan. As a result of these two influences the strong union between the teaching hospital and the medical school is rapidly breaking down in our country and producing a serious problem in medical education.
This has not been true in other countries which have embraced government support of health care. In the United Kingdom the teaching hospital is the recognized centre of the hospital region. It is accepted that its costs will be from 25 per cent to 30 per cent higher per patient-day than those of any other hospital in the region. Its facilities are greater, its staff is larger and its patient clientele is assured because it is the only hospital in the district that can look after problem cases. In Sweden, despite a prepaid system outside the hospital, the same arrangements prevail inside the hospital as occur in the United Kingdom and thus the patients and the facilities to ensure the training of physicians are assured. A second influence which increasingly enters the scene is represented by the rapidly spiralling costs of medical education. Standards are being set in other countries

which our universities are desperately trying to meet without adequate sources of funds.
I have explained how in the United Kingdom the additional costs of clinical teaching are considered part and parcel of the health care plan. In the United States the solution was found in quite a different way. It was painfully obvious that medical education needed more financial support than it was receiving from the education budget. There were problems associated with federal sources of funds being granted to state supported medical schools for educational purposes. Accordingly the federal government of the United States has undertaken to support medical schools indirectly by huge increases in the grants available for medical research, virtually all of which is done in medical schools. The speed and extent of the explosion of these funds can best be illustrated by outlining the budgets for government support of medical research in the U.S.A. in the past few years. For several years, up to and including 1959, there was approximately $250 million available for support of medical research in the United States. Most of this was going to the 87 medical schools in that country. In the year 1960 this was increased from $250 million to $425 million; in 1961 it was increased to $650 million; in 1962 it was increased to $890 million, and in 1963 it is no less than $1,100 million.
After removing a significant amount of these funds to pay for the federally operated medical research laboratories in Bethesda, Maryland, and other centres, there still remains an enormous amount of money to be divided among the 87 medical schools in that country. During this year, if the money were averaged it would amount to approximately $10 million per medical school. In Canada the total sum of money from government sources available for the support of medical research is about $12 million and would provide each of our 12 medical schools, if it were evenly divided among them, with something less than $1 million per year. Thus the 12 universities in Canada which have undertaken the responsibility or the education of physicians have been desperately trying to find the funds to put their medical schools in a position in which they can compete with other medical schools on this continent. The medical schools are taking an embarrassingly large percentage of the total university budget for a very small percentage of the total students. In the University of British Columbia 9.5 per cent of the budget goes to the support of 1.5 per cent of the students who are in the medical school. Despite the heroic efforts that have been made by universities

to keep pace with what is going on in medical education in other countries, they are fighting a losing battle.
Over this long open border between the United States and Canada there is great freedom of interchange of medical scientists. Over 5,000 Canadian educated physicians are now living within that country. Most of these physicians have gone there to practise, but in recent years a much more serious trend has developed. Partly because we cannot compete either in salary scales or in working conditions, we are tending to lose more of our most able medical educators to that country. More important perhaps is the fact that with the facilities and staff that can be obtained under these very generous research grants, there are research potentials in the United States which are not available in our country. Thus the very core of our system of medical education and medical research is in danger of being lost to another country.
In recent months a new factor has entered the situation. Legislation has been enacted in the United States which provides federal sources of funds for the building of teaching facilities for medical schools in that country. Thus teaching hospitals and buildings in which the basic medical sciences can be taught will now be very largely supported from the federal government in addition to the support for the operation of these schools.
There is one other point concerning unfortunate factors which have come into being in recent years which must be mentioned. The number of individuals applying to medical school in this country fell steadily from the post-war peak to the year 1958. During the years 1955 to 1958, in particular, we were terribly concerned about our ability to fill even our inadequate number of places with reasonable students. Since 1958 there has been an increase in the number applying for medicine. However, we do not believe that this increase is the result of any change in forces that are being brought to bear on the situation. Rather it is because the post-war baby boom has reached the stage of entry to medical school, and we are simply deriving our applicants to medical school from a temporarily larger group of people who are attending university.
There is obviously more than one reason for this diminution of people attending medical schools. Fifty years ago a very high percentage of all the young people who entered university found their way into medical schools. Apart from law and the church, there were few other attractive careers available to them. Now a very small percentage of the total number of students who enter universities come to medical school. So many new 28902-5-364J
Supply-Privy Council attractive careers have come into being in the past half century that medicine must now make very active efforts to recruit its share of intelligent young people.
This factor has been in operation in every country in the past half century, but in our country still another factor has come into operation in recent years. Some years ago in an attempt to increase the number of individuals attracted into the physical sciences, such as chemistry and physics, the government, through the national research council, created a subsidization program. This program provides that once a good student has obtained his bachelor's degree in the physical sciences, he is supported in the amount of approximately $2,200 for whatever number of years is required to obtain his Ph.D. degree.
The future members of the health sciences of this country, the physicians and the dentists must be selected from capable young students who have shown an interest in the general field of science. However, let us compare the financial problems facing the student who wishes to enter the field of medicine with the student who wishes to enter the field of science. In most schools in Canada it is at the end of the third year of university that he must make this decision. If the student decides in favour of physics or chemistry, he has one more year in which to pay his fees at the university until he receives his baccalaureate degree. Thereafter, if he is a good student, he will receive the government subsidization program for the three or four years necessary to obtain his Ph.D. and will then be able to step into a well paid position. In contrast, the student wishing to enter medicine must pay four years of the highest fees which the university charges for the remainder of his undergraduate medical education, with no subsidization program available to help him. He must then take a minimum of one year's interneship, which would barely provide him with enough remuneration on which to subsist. If he wishes to proceed to specialty training, he will require four more years of a bare subsistence income before he can begin to go further into debt by setting up his office and awaiting the arrival of his first paying patient.
Is there any wonder that the number of individuals applying to enter medicine in Canada has diminished in recent years, and is there any wonder that this diminution in numbers is particularly notable among the brighter students who are assured of the subsidization program if they go into other areas? I think it must be made very clear that, if a subsidization program is instituted for one part of the field of science to the

Supply-Privy Council exclusion of the remainder of that field, it will cause an entirely artificial emphasis on those areas which are being subsidized. I fear that, unless we do something to more nearly equalize the financial problems of higher education in these various groups, we may, 25 years from now, pay very heavily in a reduced level of medical care in our country.
To summarize our second question, after achieving an extremely high level of medical education in our country, three apparently unrelated forces have come into being in recent years which have reduced that level. These are:
1.	Lack of recognition that teaching hospitals must receive a greater degree of support than usual general hospitals.
2.	Rapid increase in support of medical education in other countries.
3.	Subsidization of other science students in Canada.
The acuteness of the present situation can perhaps be best illustrated by events which have taken place within the past year. In the United States and Canada there is an accreditation panel for medical schools. Approximately every eight years every medical school on this continent is visited by a team of medical educators. The school is studied intensely over a period of several days. Thereafter a report is written describing the school and a recommendation goes to the association of American medical colleges as to whether this school should or should not continue to be accredited. Failure to obtain accreditation means a school really must close its doors. Because of the difference in the degree of financial support of medical schools in the United States and Canada a difficult task faces the evaluators. It is just not possible to apply to Canadian schools the same high standards as are being applied to American schools. Perhaps this is best summarized in the words of Dean Chester Stewart of Dalhousie University, in his report to the Canadian universities foundation earlier this year at the end of his term of office as president of the association of Canadian medical colleges. Dr. Stewart stated:
It is probably well known to most university teachers that medical education in Canada has made immense forward strides. Our medical schools have become the equal of any in the world and have made outstanding contributions to the development of medical education and research. Perhaps few are aware, however, of the rapidly widening gap between progress in medical education in the United States and Canada. We would ask the Canadian universities foundation to consider the implications of what has been frankly called "the double standard of medical education on this continent", a comment by a senior member of the accrediting bodies. It would be little short of tragic if some of our Canadian medical schools were to lose their status as fully

accredited institutions just at a time when there is a growing pressure for the expansion of medical school facilities in order to meet the physician requirements of this country.
I am not by nature a pessimist and I do not enjoy the role of being a prophet of doom and gloom. However, I feel strongly that if we, in our country, fail to keep pace with other countries in the support of educational opportunities in the field of medicine, we will pay a heavy price in the years ahead in the quality of medical care available to us. Immediately we will pay the price of losing our most able teachers and investigators to those parts of the world where the necessary support is available to them.
Now the final question is: What does the future hold? I think this can be answered briefly. If Canadians are to receive adequate health care in future the 12 universities that have taken on the responsibility for the education of physicians must have more assistance. I think it is appropriate that this assistance come from federal sources of funds. A medical school is much more than a local asset. Physicians travel widely both in their post-graduate training and in their subsequent locations of practice. The increased sources of funds provided to medical schools must be for three purposes:
1.	There must be a very significant increase in the support of the day to day cost of medical schools. A very significant proportion of this could be taken care of by including the cost of clinical medical education in the Diagnostic Services and Hospital Insurance Act. Without increasing significantly the tremendous sums of money which are now going to the support of hospitalization, the problems of the medical schools in Canada could be sharply reduced.
2.	Assistance must be provided for the development of buildings both for teaching and for research. Such assistance was recommended by Dr. Ray Farquharson's special committee two years ago. Although accepted in principle, no action has been taken by government. We do not have a single university owned and operated hospital in the twelve medical schools of our country. We are dependant upon the use of general hospitals in the communities in which the medical school is located. While this has worked well in the past, the interest of these general hospitals is increasingly in conflict vuth the interests of medical education, as I have tried to point out.
3.	We need support and subsidization for students entering into the health science field. At the present time 84 per cent of all medical students depend largely on their parents' funds to put them through school. Approximately 20 per cent of graduate students in the fields of science depend to any

degree on parental assistance. As long as this situation exists, a proper share of the bright young minds of Canada will not be directed towards a medical career and in future the health of our country will suffer.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Supply-Privy Council
importance for them to take their place in Ottawa. Such a scheme should be carried out especially in the province of Quebec.
Mr. Chairman, it is all well and good to complain and to suggest, as is done in certain quarters, that we are unfairly treated in Ottawa, but if French speaking Canadians are unwilling to make the required effort to take their place within the federal civil service, I feel we are in no way justified in casting the blame on somebody else. But, as I said earlier, a more favourable climate should be created here in Ottawa, more especially with regard to competitions.
Mr. Chairman, according to the findings of the Glassco report or of the minority Therrien report, there is a complete lack of the French element in crown corporations.
I do not ask the government to impose its Will over the crown corporations, since they are independent governmental agencies which have nothing to do with politics, but I would like the minister, if possible, with all the influence I know he has, to make some suggestions to the presidents of these crown corporations in order to encourage them to make the necessary efforts, for instance, in visiting the Quebec universities, to state before the students the interest and the urgency there is for them to take their place amid the crown corporations.
Mr. Chairman, the minister, who, I believe, is well intentioned, spoke about an administration training school for federal civil servants. I would suggest he be a little more careful in that respect, since education comes under provincial jurisdiction. I wonder if he could not, using his influence, convince the premiers of the provinces, including that of Quebec, to establish a department where students would be prepared for public service, in order that they may be more anxious to come to Ottawa.
Now, I would suggest to the premier of Quebec, who sat for a long time in this house, who occupied a ministerial position, and who certainly knows the weaknesses of the federal civil service, in so far as French speaking Canadians are concerned, that he would certainly be in a position to have a special budget voted in order to create a university department to prepare French Canadian civil servants to come to Ottawa to occupy the place that belongs to them.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to resort to an article which was published in Le Devoir on August 19 last, to make the next few remarks. The writer of the article was Mr. Jean-Pierre Fournier. Here is what he had to say:
Even though the administration school which the federal government intends to establish is not

useless, it could not be the key to bilingualism in the public service.
(1) On the one hand, the essential point is not to enable classified civil servants to acquire a fluent knowledge of both languages, but to ensure to French Canada its just representation at all levels of the civil service, based on the proportion of the French Canadian population.
Mr. Chairman, the fact of the matter is that in Ottawa, we have a problem with translators and interpreters; I take this opportunity to point out to the minister that the only way to find a sufficient number of them is to increase their salary. I suggest they be offered a more attractive remuneration, as they are hard to find. I am told they are few and far between in Canada, and that the best means to attract them to Ottawa is to offer them a higher salary.
I also suggest to the minister that civil servants in categories 1 and 2, be also granted an increase. I believe those are the only categories which have been overlooked, when the salaries of the federal civil servants were revised.
Mr. Chairman, quite recently, on October 18 last, Le Devoir published an article with the following title.
Ottawa-eight civil servants denounce the fate of Quebec university graduates.
The article quoted a letter signed by eight federal civil servants. I would like the minister to check the facts pointed out by the newspaper. Could the minister tell us whether he has personally looked into the matter?
Mr. Chairman, the minister told us about forthcoming reforms. I put on the order paper a question asking how many bilingual employees worked in the Prime Minister's office. I must tell you frankly that I was disappointed when I read the answer given me. In fact, I noticed that there is great difference in the number of French speaking, and English speaking employees in the Prime Minister's office. And I ask the minister to remedy that situation so that the government itself and, therefore, the Prime Minister, will set an example to create a favourable climate and, indirectly, attract more French speaking Canadians to take their place in Ottawa.
Mr. Chairman, before closing, I ask the minister if it might not be time to study the possibility of setting up a research office for all the members of the house so that they may have all the information they need to prepare their speeches and the questions they put on the order paper or ask in the house. I know that such a body exists in other countries and I see no reason why experts should not be available to inform the members, thus helping them to make a better contribution to the debates of the house, and at the same time being of service to their country.

Mr. Chairman, I wish the minister well. The work had already been started; he showed his good faith by telling us that he wants to follow it up by carrying out the recommendations contained in the Glassco report and those in the Therrien minority report. Therefore, I wish him well, and next year, when his estimates are introduced, we shall ask him to report the progress made.


Mr. Cantelon:: I should like to take up a few minutes of the time of this committee, while we are discussing the estimates of the privy council, to make a proposal. First, I should like to say I am very much in accord with the suggestions made by the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway and by the hon. member for Queens with regard to education. On previous occasions I have made contributions to debate in which the same ideas were promulgated.
In making the proposal I have in mind, let me say at the outset that it is not put forward by my party; it is being made by myself, though I would hope my party would not oppose it. I trust, also, that this proposal would not have any tinge of partisanship attached to it. In fact, I am sure it could not succeed if it carried any such stigma. Certainly, none is intended on my part and I would hope, if the proposal were accepted, that none would be allowed to creep in. Further, may I say that the proposal is not mine. It is the brainchild of a young Saskatchewan man who believes it would be a popular and attractive way of celebrating our centenary year in 1967.
I am sure we all feel too much could not be done to emphasize the importance of our 100th birthday. But nothing seems to have been planned for one most important group-a group which is just ready to step on to the stage of life and a group which is sometimes unjustly maligned-the teenagers. It is to this group that my suggestion is directed. Baldly stated, it is that a youth parliament be held in Ottawa in the summer of 1967. Many details would have to be worked out before such a parliament could be held. We would have to decide how many delegates there should be, how they should be selected, just when and where the parliament would be held, and a great many other similar questions. Assistance could, perhaps, be given by some of our national service groups. If these groups could be persuaded to give their support it would, no doubt, mean a great deal to any such scheme.
I have here an article from the Daily Gleaner of Fredericton which sets down in some detail the various things which could be done in connection with this proposal, and
Supply-Privy Council some of the difficulties which might arise. If I might have the approval of the house I would like to have this article incorporated in the report of my remarks as they will appear in Hansard. I do not think I will read it, because I do not wish to take up the time of the committee by elaborating this proposal in detail.
This scheme is, perhaps, most worth while because it might show us and the people of this country the characteristic which is so strong in this group-the forward-looking idealism which in the past has so often given us an impetus for making reforms. There is already a basis for a scheme such as I have suggested, since youth parliaments are in operation now in some areas, notably in my own province of Saskatchewan. I sincerely believe that this plan is worthy of serious consideration and I therefore respectfully suggest to the Prime Minister that an appointed committee consisting of two government supporters, two from the official opposition, two from the New Democratic party, one from Ralliement Creditistes and one from the Social Credit party be convened to consider it further, and to bring in recommendations to this parliament relative to it.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I rise briefly to support the pleas made by previous members who have spoken urging the government to give immediate and serious consideration tp the needs of universities which require plant and equipment, and to the question of scholarships and loans for students.
I have been asked by graduates and students of the universities of British Columbia, Victoria and Notre Dame who are resident in my constituency to remind the government of the election pledge to provide 10,000 scholarships valued at $1,000 each. This is a pledge which was taken seriously by young people throughout the country, and by many other Canadians who are expecting the government to keep that promise. In fact, some of these young students planned their future activities in the hope of winning one of these scholarships, but I must say that what has happened so far has not justified their confidence in the promises made by government spokesmen during the election campaign.
However, in my opinion even these scholarships will not by any means meet the rapidly growing need for assistance to universities and to students. I presume that assistance to students will be of two types. First, there will be scholarships for those who are able to win scholarships and demonstrate their particular skill and ability to do so. Then I believe there should be a system of loans. I am not one who believes

Supply-Privy Council that you should hand out something for nothing to young people. I believe that you value what you earn. In my view we should establish a sound system of loans available to students who have the ability to go through university and to apply that ability to university studies, advanced studies and so on.
I might say that I discussed this problem recently with a person who is very interested in education. We were considering the problem in relation to the circumstances of the country, the financial ability of the federal and provincial governments to meet these needs and the fact that this should be done on some sound basis, not just on the basis of handing out money wholesale to anybody who says he wants to attend university. This gentleman asked me to bring this point to the attention of the minister. I thought it was a rather novel suggestion. He suggested that consideration should be given to loans to students who could take advantage of such loans-there would have to be some winnowing out-and who would graduate, and as a result greatly improve their earning ability. He went on to suggest that these loans could be repaid on the basis of the government establishing an education tax of 1, 2 or 3 per cent of their income, whatever might be necessary, over a period of years in their earning life so that repayment would not be a heavy burden on them in their first earning years, but would be on a sound basis. I do not know whether consideration has been given to that sort of scheme but I suggest that it merits consideration, as well as other schemes that will make it possible for young, capable persons to obtain loans from the federal or provincial governments as the result of federal-provincial co-operation. These could be repaid in such a way that they would not constitute a great strain on them in their early earning years. With these few remarks I resume my seat.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Chairman, I have a few remarks to make about the estimates of the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Lamon-tagne).
In fact, I must tell you that before knowing him as the President of the Privy Council, I knew him most of all as an orthodox economist. It is only since becoming a member of this house and President of the Privy Council that he has directed his activity to other fields, for instance to the reports submitted by the various commissions or federal-provincial relations which, I think, come first among his functions.
I feel, however, that the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) was well advised to change his
[Mr. Herridge.l
field of activity because in this one he can show greater efficiency than in the other.
I see that the President of the Privy Council does not seem to appreciate my qualifying his talent in economics as conventional, but it seems to me that he follows mainly the antiquated methods and doctrines of the 19th century, if not of the 18th, as far as political economy is concerned.
I have some remarks to make and I think that the President of the Privy Council is well disposed to receive fruitfully these remarks and try to find solutions to the few problems I would like to point out today.
First of all, I would like to raise a problem which I consider important. I listened last Sunday to the press conference given by the Quebec premier, Mr. Jean Lesage, during the television program on public affairs or political events of the day. I do not know whether the President of the Privy Council had the opportunity to listen to that program. He nods; he will then understand my remarks all the better. I found during the program that the premier of Quebec showed a really pitiful attitude and talked in a soppy tone. In short, he looked depressed and in low spirits after returning almost empty-handed from the federal-provincial conference.
Being aware of the legendary courage of the premier of Quebec, I thought he would soon abandon that pitiful and soppy attitude, that the reaction would set in before long and that he would deliver new ultimatums, taking a really resolute stand, in order to get what the province of Quebec claims, faced with its priority needs.
I suggest that the President of the Privy Council should not wait for that reaction to set in but that he should undertake an open-minded examination of Quebec's requests and problems and, as the hon. member for Ville-neuve (Mr. Caouette) would say, to consider in a more broadminded spirit the problems which interest both the provincial and federal governments and to accede to Quebec's legitimate requests.
If the President of the Privy Council looked at that program he must have noticed that the Quebec premier looked depressed and beaten. I hope he will react and show more firmness than he did in the past because when he starts changing the word "demand" for "request" or "require" his most simple requests remain unsatisfied. It is inferred that in order to obtain something from the federal government, a firmer stand must still be taken.
I ask the President of the Privy Council who is, I believe, a friend of the Quebec premier and who understands, not only the requests of that premier, but also those of

all the people in Quebec, to help find a solution to those problems by meeting the priority requirements of the province of Quebec.
Mr. Chairman, I do not think that the province of Quebec, especially after the reaction felt among the public following Ottawa's refusal to comply with its requests, will tolerate much longer to be treated as it was at the last federal-provincial conference. The general disappointment which was noted among the people is an indication that the province of Quebec will no longer tolerate its requests being turned down.
Another point which, in my opinion, comes under the President of the Privy Council, and for which he should make claims and use pressure, is the statement made yesterday or the day before by the mayor of Ottawa to the effect that Ottawa is and will remain an unilingual city.
As we are in the city of Ottawa, I feel we have the right to speak French in this city. People are talking of bilingualism, but this should not stop there, it must become a reality, without it being necessary to ask permission from the Ontario government. Considering the importance of the city of Ottawa in the country, since it is the capital and the seat of central government, where French speaking as well as English speaking members of parliament sit, we must see to it that everyone feels at home here and is welcomed by persons having a sense of hospitality.
When we talk about bilingualism, we do not seek to take away anything from other people; we merely want for everybody the right to speak his own language. Now, in the federal capital, we would not like to be deprived of this right.
I would describe the mayor of Ottawa as a female tyrant.


An hon. Member:: It is true.


Gilles Grégoire: I may say that I was very happy to see that the English speaking newspapers condemned her backward attitude. It obviously indicates that the English speaking press understands the situation and, more rightly so, the nation's capital ought to proclaim itself a completely bilingual city, since citizens representing ridings all over the country live there. I shall add that when the mayor of Ottawa comes in the province of Quebec, she is welcome, she may speak her own language, she is understood in her own language, because, in the province of Quebec, we are happy to receive her in a bilingual fashion. Let her do the same thing in the country's capital.
I recognize she may have some inhibitions which lead her to vent her spleen occasionally. In my opinion, she could have vented
28902-5-365
Supply-Privy Council her ill-humour on another matter. There is precisely an opera aria which is entitled "La donna e mobile" or "Like a Feather in the Air". I believe that on the subject of bilingualism, the mayor of Ottawa could be more serious and stop going around "like a feather in the air", as is said in that famous opera by Verdi.
Mr. Chairman, I would now like to touch on a point which gave rise to several remarks in the Canadian press recently, that is, the presence of the president of Trans-Canada Air Lines at the meeting of the parliamentary committee on railways, air lines and shipping. In my opinion, this is in order, since the subject concerns the question of relations between the two great nations which form this country. In that respect, I would like to make a correction. There is no question of blaming the president of Trans-Canada Air Lines for his attitude towards bilingualism in the country. On the contrary, I believe it is in Trans-Canada Air Lines, among all the crown corporations, that bilingualism is the most respected.
The ratio maintained at T.C.A., that is 28 per cent of the employees being French Canadian or bilingual, would seem acceptable to me. Mr. McGregor stated the other day a commendable fact when he said that for the last year, no employee who has to come in contact with the public has been hired unless he was bilingual, that is able to be understood by the two great nations living in this country. I have no fear in saying that we must encourage Mr. McGregor and admit that he possesses a real sense of bilingualism. Indeed, within his corporation, nothing suits him better than to meet his obligation in that field.
But he is blameworthy on another point, that is for his adamant attitude in hiding from Canadians facts which they have the right to know. In view of the unkind remarks by the president of T.C.A. for the Sud-Avia-tion Corporation and the Caravelle aircraft, people are justified to ask why they refuse to build that aircraft in Montreal, thus enabling Montreal workers to earn a livelihood when there is unemployment.
In fact, the experts' report seemed to have been brushed aside. We do not object if workers are employed at the general maintenance base in Winnipeg, if Winnipeg workers earn a livelihood, but we wonder why a report by experts is brushed aside when a French aircraft is involved, when Montreal is concerned. We are given no reason, no argument. They refuse to produce the report and they are unkind and even unscrupulous towards the Sud-Aviation Corporation.
Montreal workers are not given satisfaction and that is what the people of the



S726 HOUSE OF

[Stage Direction]
Supply-Privy Council province of Quebec cannot tolerate. How come the public is not allowed to examine the report? Security is given as a pretext while nowadays, all over the world, in South America as well as in Europe, people never cease praising the qualities of that aircraft in terms of security and they even go as far as saying it is the safest aircraft in the world at the present time. We are given no reason and we wonder whether it is not a matter of favouring the United States.
That is the opinion among the people of Quebec and it is derived from the evidence given by Mr. McGregor concerning the purchase of new airplanes.
Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, I am rising on a point of order. It is impossible for me to relate these remarks to the estimates now under consideration. I wonder if the Chair would rule on this point?


The Deputy Chairman:: Order. I have been listening to the hon. member for Lapointe and I do feel he is not remaining very closely with the estimates now under consideration. I would hope, if he is going to continue his remarks, that he would try as far as possible to stay within the limits of this department.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Chairman, I thank you for that information. I shall come back now to the estimates of the President of the Privy Council, because federal-provincial relations fall within his jurisdiction, as is also the case for the inquiry on biculturalism.
I feel it is my duty to point out to the President of the Privy Council, that federal-provincial relations will be friendly and that our culture will blossom freely only if there is harmony between all the regions of this country.
While I am on that point, Mr. Chairman, may I state that, in the face of interference tending to favour a given province, to the prejudice of another, where unemployment is worse-and I am thinking of the case of Trans-Canada Air Lines-we must expect people to wonder what are the reasons for such happenings.
Mr. Chairman, this brings my remarks to a close. I am sure that the President of the Privy Council knows all about the present problem. I think he will find the necessary solutions in the field of federal-provincial relations, and, more particularly, as far as the "bonne entente" between our two ethnic groups is concerned. We must see to it that each of these groups develops, blossoms out and improves by means of its own, while retaining harmonious relations with the other group.


Mr. Chretien:: Would the hon. member for Lapointe allow me a question?


Gilles Grégoire: Certainly.


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: In the first part of his speech, the hon. member dealt with provincial politics and the nature of the meeting which he held in Donnacona over the week end. Could the hon. member for Lapointe tell us whether he suggested to Mr. Gerald Martineau in which constituency he should run at the next provincial election?


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Chairman, I have never met the person mentioned nor talked to him. However, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for St. Maurice-Lafleche has to take his orders from those who contribute to the election fund; as for myself, I do not even have to bother about that, but he is on his hands and knees before the treasurer of his party.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Order. Will the hon. gentleman resume his seat, please.
When the hon. member for Kindersley was making his remarks a few moments ago he requested that there be included in Hansard a short article from a newspaper. His request was not heard by me, but I understand the transcript of his speech shows that he did ask for permission to do this. Would the committee now grant permission to the hon. member to have included in his remarks this very short article?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Gordon Minto Churchill: No, Mr. Chairman. I would like to agree to the request of the hon. member for Kindersley, and I heard it when he was making his speech; but I think the precedent that would be set by this would not be tenable in the future. Newspaper comment can be summarized or read into the record, but simply to hand to the Hansard reporter material of that nature is, I think, not at all customary in the house and is something we would have to guard against very carefully.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Perhaps I could explain to the hon. member that the short article was an explanation of the plan which the hon. member was presenting, and I presume that if permission had not been granted by the committee, he would have read or summarized the article.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I regret, Mr. Chairman, that we did not deal with this request at the time. I was not aware that the chairman had not heard the request of the hon. member. But if we grant this request, how then can we refuse others who may make similar requests in the future? Perhaps if the hon. member speaks again, as he would have an

opportunity to do, he might summarize this article and make sure that his statement is in Hansard.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
40a. Expenses of the royal commission on taxation, $250,000.
Maurice Lamontagne: Mr. Chairman, I may appear at this stage to filibuster my own estimates, but I promised some weeks ago to make a statement on centennial agencies and centennial projects and programs. I believe this kind of statement will be useful at this stage, not only to members of the house and members of this committee but also to the population in general. I want first to deal with the centennial agencies. It may appear to the casual observer from this point of view that there is a surfeit of organizations, agencies and structures throughout Canada for planning the centennial. This may be a legitimate complaint at the moment, but I believe that once programs begin to emerge involving the three levels of government and private organizations in every part of the country, these agencies will each find their role and serve their purpose as they are meant to.
In the private sector, the Canadian centenary council has been established "to stimulate interest and to educate the Canadian public for appropriate observances of the anniversary of confederation in 1967 by encouraging, undertaking and assisting centenary projects of a lasting and beneficial nature to the community". I have quoted from their constitution. This Canadian centenary council is a purely private and voluntary body which is designed to work in close co-operation with private organizations while maintaining close liaison with government agencies. I am convinced that the council will play a most useful role in the preparation of the centennial celebrations, as I said in a recent letter to its president, Dr. Norman MacKenzie. I would like to quote briefly from that letter:
-the Prime Minister and all members of the government are in full agreement about the importance of thought and action directed toward the centenary by individual citizens and by their many private organizations...
For maximum effect these efforts of Canadian citizens and Canadian organizations must have a focal point, a centre for clearance, for planning and for the exchange of views and experience. Outside the national centennial administration, which is the federal agency established by law for the purpose of planning the centennial with a national approach, the Canadian centenary council represents the only national voluntary organization whose sole purpose and object is to further centennial planning...
We have been pleased to note not only the existence of the Canadian centenary council, and its accomplishments during the past few years, but also its record of working effectively and harmoniously with the organizations established for 28902-5-3654
Supply-Privy Council
the centenary by the government. The federal government invites the Canadian centenary council-


Herman Maxwell Batten: Order. I wonder if the minister is speaking on vote 40a, or is he on vote 45?


Maurice Lamontagne: I thought it was 45a, Mr. Chairman.


Herman Maxwell Batten: No, we have not yet reached vote 45a.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National centennial administration-
45. General administration, $250,000.
Maurice Lamontagne: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to finish quoting from the letter to the president of the Canadian centenary council:
The federal government invites the Canadian centenary council to continue to work closely with the national centennial administration.
In the private sector all across the country voluntary associations, agencies and corporations are developing centennial programs. It is not the size of the project that counts. Some of them will be small by force of circumstances, but it is the total and the quality that count. I am informed that many of these voluntary programs, large and small, are already in operation.
In the public sector, a great number of municipalities have already set up local centennial committees and we hope that every municipality in Canada will have its own local committee in the near future. All provinces have designated a minister to be responsible for the centennial celebrations and most of them have set up their own provincial agencies. At the federal level, the government has constituted a cabinet committee on the 1967 program and an interdepartmental committee of officials which will coordinate all the activities of the different federal departments and agencies directly or indirectly related to the centennial celebrations.
The national centennial administration is the central federal agency charged with originating, developing and implementing projects and programs as approved by the governor in council. It has a specific responsibility for centennial projects which it will undertake itself within its own terms of reference, but it is also the agency of the federal government charged with the responsibility of implementing the federal program of grants for local centennial projects in collaboration with the provinces. Finally, it will play an important part in advising other federal departments and agencies on centennial projects conceived and developed directly by these

Supply-Privy Council departments. The national centennial administration is a crown corporation with a commissioner, a deputy commissioner and eight directors who were appointed in January, 1963. Since May of this year, the administration has been busy recruiting government personnel for the tremendous task ahead and developing these projects and programs.
Finally, there are two liaison agencies. The national committee on the centennial is responsible for liaison at government level. It is composed of two federal ministers and ten provincial ministers responsible for the centennial celebrations and their advisers. In other words, this national committee is a federal-provincial conference on the centennial. The national committee met in October of this year for the first time since 1961 and will meet again in the middle of December.
The national conference on the centennial is an over-all advisory and liaison agency which consists of 20 representatives, whose nominations were proposed by the provincial governments themselves, and of 40 members at large representing the different segments of the Canadian population. In addition, representatives from the Canadian centenary council and from youth movements are invited as observers. The national centennial administration provides its secretariat and its staff.
The national conference met for the first time in the middle of October this year in Ottawa. This meeting was, of course, of a preliminary nature. The general aspects of federal-provincial programs were reviewed and other centennial projects were also discussed. A steering committee was set up to act in an executive capacity. This committee met in November to prepare the next meeting of the conference which will be held in Ottawa next week.
This administrative set-up, with its various agencies, may seem to be unduly complicated and cumbersome. I believe, however, it reflects the character of our country with its federal structure and its sparse population distributed over a wide territory. I can assure hon. members also that everything will be done to avoid duplication and overlapping between these various agencies.
I should like now to report briefly on the centennial projects and programs which are under consideration at the present time. This report will be limited to those projects and programs which are directly connected with the federal government. They can be divided into two categories, capital works programs and other projects. The federal government will participate in financing or initiate three different capital works programs.
First, the federal government is offering assistance to local or regional capital works
[Mr. Lamontagne.l
projects. Federal grants are distributed through the national centennial administration and paid out of the national centennial fund. They are subject to varying conditions. First, an application for a federal grant, if it is for a local centennial project, must be made to the province. Second, the province must approve of the project and must assure the national centennial administration that two thirds of the cost will be met jointly by the province and the initiating agency. Third, the national centennial administration will pay up to one third of the estimated cost of approved projects, the grant being made to the province. Fourth, a project which is eligible for other forms of federal aid will also be eligible for a centennial grant, provided that the aggregate federal contribution does not exceed 50 per cent of the cost. Fifth, the total amount available under this program will be one dollar per capita of the province based on the population on June 1, 1963. Sixth, the projects must have a reasonable prospect of being completed by the time of the centennial observance. Seventh, anticipated revenue from the project will be taken into consideration in determining the amount of federal contribution.
A project must be of a lasting nature and might include, for example, acquisition and construction of buildings, parks and other capital works; the acquisition of buildings of historic or architectural merit; the restoration of buildings of historic or architectural merit; the writing and publishing of books; the composition of musical works, and the creation and completion of painting, sculpture and other works of art. However, it does not include any part of pageants or celebrations or administrative expenses of local committees.
This program will be implemented within the framework of specific federal-provincial agreements. The terms and conditions of these agreements have already been discussed in detail with all the provinces. Copies of the proposed agreements have been sent to the provincial governments several weeks ago. Four provinces have signed this agreement and others are expected to do so before the end of this year.
Thus, there will be no direct federal assistance to local or regional centennial projects of the capital works type. All requests for aid concerning such projects must be sent to provincial governments or to their centennial agencies rather than to the federal government or the national centennial administration.
The second program involving federal participation concerns provincial capital works projects. The federal government has agreed to pay 50 per cent of the cost of two buildings which will commemorate the two conferences held in Charlottetown and Quebec city in

1864. It is anticipated that early in May 1964, the Fathers of Confederation Memorial Building, Charlottetown, which is jointly financed by the federal government and by the ten provincial governments, will be completed and ready for use. This building will play a very important part next year in the special observances of the centennial of the 1864 confederation conference.
Another building for the performing arts will be erected in Quebec city to commemorate the Quebec conference. Construction work will begin next year. A special program of celebrations to commemorate those two historic conferences will be announced shortly.
Finally, the federal government will undertake a special building program in the capital district which will help to improve the cultural life and institutions, not only in the area but in the whole country. This program will include the national library and archives building, the national museum building, the redevelopment of confederation square, including possibly a convention centre and auditorium, and the restoration of the Thompson mill at Victoria island. Finally, the establishment of a national centre for the performing arts is under active consideration by the government.
The federal government is also developing another kind of program designed to prepare for, to celebrate or to commemorate the centennial. The acquisition and construction of buildings, parks and other permanent capital works will be excluded from this program. Eligible projects will be partly or wholly financed by the federal government and will have to be of a national or interprovincial character.
In order to celebrate the centennial, we must prepare for it. This means that Canadians, especially young people, must improve their knowledge of Canada and her history. We hope that Canadian teachers, especially in the field of history, will intensify their efforts in this respect. Beginning early next year, we intend to work in close co-operation with Canadian newspapers and magazines, as well as with our broadcasting networks and film producers to initiate special projects with these organizations if necessary in order to create greater interest in the centennial and its celebrations. We will also begin in 1964 to participate financially in an expanded youth travel and exchange program in collaboration with existing private organizations. We hope also Canadians, instead of criticizing what is done or not done in preparation for the centennial, will continue to send suggestions and proposals to the national centennial administration in Ottawa or to the Canadian centenary council or to the appropriate provincial authorities.
Supply-Privy Council
The preparation for the ceremonial program or the so-called birthday party has begun. Such projects as the confederation caravans, floating exhibits and a military searchlight tattoo are under consideration. Other projects for the centennial celebration are also being considered, such as a special travel program with particular emphasis on young Canadians, a series of international events to take place in Canada in 1967, an international and a national festival for the performing arts which would tour the main cities of our country.
In addition, other projects which would not only contribute to the celebration of the centennial but would also have a lasting value in commemorating the Canadian confederation are under study. They include such projects as a series of films on Canadian history, including a colour film on ethnic groups, the collection of basic documents on Indian history and culture to serve as source material, a centennial volume covering the Canadian centenary to be used by the dominion bureau of statistics, special editions of the Canada Year Book and the Canada Handbook, a definitive edition of the debates of the House of Commons from 1867 to 1874, a new edition of Canadian ministries since confederation, a biographical dictionary of all members and Senators since 1867, the papers of Canadian prime ministers commencing with Sir John A. Macdonald and Sir Wilfrid Laurier, a bibliography of Cana-diana between 1867 and 1900, a series of lectures by distinguished personalities from abroad under the auspices of the national gallery, a possible new general issue of stamps for 1967 incorporating a centennial symbol, the establishment of a national symphony orchestra and of two national theatre groups, the sponsorship of national amateur festivals. Other suggestions are under review; a special coinage issue and medallions for school children, the commissioning of works of art, a Canadian anthology recommended by the Canadian authors association, a proposed youth parliament, as mentioned this afternoon, representative of all the constituencies of Canada to meet in the House of Commons. Finally, the Department of External Affairs is also considering special programs which would come under its direct responsibility.
We must try to make the centennial available to the maximum number of Canadians throughout the whole of Canada. This is why we are featuring exchanges and portable exhibits and encouraging Canadians to travel at home. We propose to do our best within the bounds of the sensible and practical to bring the centennial to the people of Canada.



Supply-Privy Council
Those are some of the projects which have been decided upon or are presently under active consideration. Some of these projects will be changed and reshaped or even replaced by others as the order of priorities is reassessed. Undoubtedly, other worth-while projects will be added to this list as our discussions and our work progress. I will be pleased to report to the house on projects and programs related to the centennial from time to time as decisions are reached.
This short report clearly indicates how the government intends to prepare and to celebrate the Canadian confederation centennial. We wish this great historical event to serve the purpose of proving as well as enhancing the Canadian people's cultural life.
Canada has made remarkable progress during the last century from the economic and even from the social standpoint. Previously to 1867, our country was made up of economically stagnating regions. Today, we are one of the wealthiest nations in the world. However, progress in our cultural life has not matched our economic and social progress.
Such a lack of balance brings to our mind the thought expressed by the French philosopher, Henri Bergson, as regards the whole modern world. Here is what he said:
Nature, in giving us an essentially active mind, had thus intended for us a certain development. But machines running on fuel, coal and white coal, and converting into motion potential energies accumulated for millions of years, have finally given to our system such tremendous expansion and power, which is so disproportionate to its size and strength, that surely nothing of the sort had been anticipated in the planned structure of our species.. .Now, in this inordinately expanded body, the soul remains what it was, too small now to fill it, too weak to direct it. Hence, the vacuum between body and soul. Hence, the formidable social, political and international problems which are so many indications of that vacuum and give rise, in order to fill it, to so many disorderly and inefficient efforts.. .The enlarged body calls for a greater soul.
Since 1867, our country has expanded physically and materially at an increasing rate. It now seems to be calling for a greater soul. It will achieve this only if it intensifies its cultural life, feeding its two main cultural streams and getting them to meet more often.
That is the major purpose the government of Canada would like to achieve for the centennial celebrations in close co-operation with the provincial governments, the municipalities, the leaders in the private sector and the greatest possible number of citizens.
If we succeed in giving to several of our cities suitable art centres, if we succeed in making of the Ottawa-Hull area a national centre where our two main cultures will be able to express themselves and to meet with the best they have to offer, if we succeed in
[Mr. Lamontagne.l
creating at least two national theatre groups, an orchestra, a ballet company, encouraging our artists to a greater extent, giving our young people the opportunity to meet and know their country better, if we succeed in knowing our history and background better thanks to the work of our researchers, we will be able to celebrate the centennial with a light heart, because we will have taken advantage together of this unique opportunity to give a new impulsion, a new start to our cultural life, to give a greater soul to our country.
There is little time left to prepare the celebration of the centennial of confederation but it is not too late, fortunately, if all men of good will agree to co-operate and work hard. The present government itself has not lost time and is now ready to carry out the various projects.
The national centennial administration is well established and will soon be able to operate fully. The national ministers' committee has been revived recently; the national conference has been established and will soon be divided into special committees. Those two agencies will meet again next week in Ottawa.
It remains, however, that the federal government cannot do everything by itself. The provinces, the municipalities and the leaders in the private sector will also have an important role to play.
In the last analysis, the success of the centennial celebrations will depend on the Canadians in general, on the interest they will take in them and on their active participation. We must therefore all work together so that 1967 will become a new start towards our destiny.

The Depuiy Chairman: The hon. member for Kindersley.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Reginald (Reg) Cantelon: I appreciate that applause, especially since I rise to correct a mistake made in the course of my address earlier this afternoon. It had been my intention, when I spoke then, to ask for the inclusion in the report of my remarks of an article which appeared in the Daily Gleaner of Fredericton, but I am afraid I did not go about it in the right way. So, with the indulgence of the committee, I would like to read that article now because I think its terms will be helpful to the committee in considering the proposal I made.
William S. Fair, 23, came to Ottawa this week to see political leaders and government officials about his proposal that senior teen-agers be selected from each federal constituency to come to Ottawa and hold a mock parliamentary session.

The politicians and centennial planners see some merit in the idea from several angles-promoting good citizenship, giving young people a special role of their own in the centennial and marking the 100th birthday of confederation.
However, the politicians and some of the centennial planners also see in Mr. Fair's plan some political pitfalls.
For one thing they wouldn't be entirely happy about having the members of the youth parliament chosen in election contests with parties run under the labels of national political bodies. The planners would be fearful of having such organizations as the youth branches of the Liberal, Conservative, New Democratic and Social Credit parties take over.
I should like to say, as an aside at this point, that I would quite agree with them.
One suggestion is that elections might be held on the basis of new, fictitious parties, or parties not now active in national political affairs.
Another point of concern is: What would the youth parliament debate? What bills might it pass? What stands might it take which might prove to be distinctly embarrassing to the government of the day in 1967?
The politicians expect another general election to be held between now and the centennial year- or, if not, in 1967 itself.
Ottawa feels the project will need the sponsorship of some national body, such as a service club with branches in all federal ridings, to handle financing and organization.
It will also need endorsation by the government and the national centennial planners. Mr. Fair has suggested that Prince Charles might open the youth parliament session in the Senate chamber -as his mother did with the Canadian parliament in 1957-and that the sessions be held in the Commons chamber.
Though it is obvious that the suggestions made in this newspaper article are merely flying kites, I think they are worth quoting in connection with what I said earlier, because the article does give some idea of the objections which might be raised as well as some indication of what might be done in order to make the plan efficient and successful.
I appreciate the observation by the President of the Privy Council that it is intended to make the centenary celebration as widespread as possible. In this connection, a youth parliament, with its membership drawn from all parts of Canada, would seem eminently to fulfil that objective.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: I listened very carefully to what was said by the President of the Privy Council as he outlined various projects planned to celebrate Canada's centennial which are now being considered, or which are under way. I should like the hon. gentleman to know that I, along with I believe most members of this group, would support many of the general proposals he has mentioned, and even a number of the specific undertakings to which he referred, including the restoration of the confederation buildings in Charlottetown, the building of some type of centre in Quebec city
Supply-Privy Council to commemorate the conference which was held there, and so on.
However, I am a little concerned about the omission of any special project to commemorate the date when two of the most important provinces in Canada actually entered confederation. I refer to 1905 when Alberta and Saskatchewan came in. There are other dates, of course-the dates when British Columbia and Manitoba joined confederation. I would think that on Canada's 100th birthday some consideration might be given to special projects commemorating these dates. I did not come prepared with any suggestions, but these came to mind while I was listening to the minister's remarks. Perhaps the federal government could undertake to build a second trans-Canada highway through these provinces and call it confederation highway. Or the federal government could undertake to build a large storage dam in the upper reaches of the South Saskatchewan river, a dam which would be a benefit to all the provinces of western Canada. I bring this up because there seems to be a lack of any provision to commemorate the dates when these other provinces came into confederation.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I just want to say these words. We are abstaining from extensive comment on the progress report given by the President of the Privy Council, because there will be plenty of opportunity next session to deal with this particular subject at some length.
We welcome this progress report. It indicates that the centenary committee is very busy. We are glad it is so active. As the minister has said, all manner of suggestions may be made to that committee, and all will receive thorough consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Emergency measures organization_
15. Administration and operation, $1,463,000.
Maurice Lamontagne: I imagine the leader of the house may have a word or two to say at this point. But if it is acceptable to members of the committee, this special vote could be taken up when the estimates of the Department of Industry are before us.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There are only a few minutes remaining to us now and it seems hardly worth while starting the estimates of another department. If there is any member who would like to say something about this subject between now and the time we adjourn the committee would, no doubt, be glad to hear his comments. I asked my colleague the Minister of Industry to come down but I am not sure if he is available.

Supply-Privy Council


Maurice Lamontagne: He is.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I hope the Minister of Industry does appear, to give us a report on this particular field of activity, because it is one which is of great interest to the people of Canada. I express regret that the Prime Minister has not continued to accept responsibility for this organization, as was done formerly, because these arrangements do affect the security of Canada and of the people who live within our boundaries. This is a matter of major importance.
The minister has now appeared and, having saved him by making those brief remarks, I will give him an opportunity to make a report.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: The report will be, by reason of the hour, relatively brief. These estimates, as members of the committee know, were prepared a year ago. They appear as a section of the privy council office estimates contained in three votes, numbers 15, 20 and 25. In the meantime, the present government arranged for the emergency measures organization to become a separate agency responsible through its own deputy head to me as minister. At the same time, the administration of the civil defence college at Arnprior was transferred to the emergency measures organization. Since estimates for the college had been prepared by the Department of National Health and Welfare, it was deemed appropriate for the minister of that department to deal with those estimates for this year.
The objectives of civil emergency planning may be put as follows:
1.	To aid our people directly and through measures taken by government at all levels better to endure the effects of nuclear war, if it should occur, so that greater numbers would survive and more of the necessary items of supply remain to meet their needs.
2.	To add to the capability of Canada to meet the requirements of a modern conventional war, remembering that such a war may well place extremely severe and unique demands upon all of us and that, among other unusual conditions, there would always be the possibility of rapid escalation into nuclear war.
3.	To reduce as far as possible the losses in life and property occurring because of natural disasters affecting Canada.
In the period since I have been responsible for this work I have had some opportunity to review it. One is impressed with the marked advance in civil emergency planning in the last few years made by the provinces of Canada. Several of them have given it attention to a degree quite unknown before. They tend to stress the need to prepare for
[Mr. Pickersgill.l
natural disasters as well as for the major hazards of a possible war. They agree that these are all risks that we must recognize and that this sort of insurance is but prudent.
Vote 15 covers administrative costs of the emergency measures organization. The total staff is modest in size, numbering at present less than 100 persons, including the staff of the ten regional offices. Vote 20 includes the program for the provision of radiac instruments to measure wartime fallout and to enable forecasts to be made of impending danger to the people from this hazard. This is a program of shared costs with the provinces. Vote 25 reflects the importance of provincial and local government programs in civil emergency planning. It provides for federal financial assistance to provinces and municipalities up to 75 per cent of their costs.
Civil emergency planning, at least at the modest degree and at the level of costs we have provided in Canada, appears to be sensible. The Cuban crisis last year emphasized fully the need for instantly available emergency measures at such a time. Continued attention is required as part of our national and international effort. Civil emergency planning is part of our total defence. It merits a suitable portion of our attention, effort and money.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, this is indeed a brief report on a very important field of activity, but I think the house is glad to have had a report. Emergency measures work in Canada has now been going on for about 13 years and, as the minister pointed out, with increased emphasis during the last several years. The response by the provinces is very gratifying indeed. According to the latest issue of the emergency measures digest, as it is called, quite a substantial number of people have received training in various aspects of survival operations, which is very much to the good. The more widely knowledge is spread with regard to survival operations the better because, as the minister pointed out in a speech he made in October, some sentences of which he could have repeated here, we have to be on our guard. I am going to repeat two or three of those sentences which are taken from an address by the minister in October, 1963. He said:
There is no guarantee, whatever we may hope, that the present mild international climate will not degenerate again into freezing weather, with or without warning. Nuclear war remains a possibility, a remote one perhaps but nevertheless a worrisome one; and as long as this condition persists, we must continue the effort to improve our chances of surviving. In short, the civil emergency preparedness program is an insurance policy. As with other forms of insurance, there will be no regrets if we never collect on the policy...

That is a quotation with which I am thoroughly in accord. This is a form of national insurance. It is a field of activity in which every Canadian should be interested. I do not think we should take the point of view that nothing can be done in the event of nuclear war. I think that is wrong. I do not think we should take the point of view that civil defence measures are an indication that a nation can endure a nuclear war. I heard that doctrine advanced just the other day. I think that is wrong. I think it is just sound common sense to be prepared for emergencies. We do so through our defence operations in order that if conventional or nuclear war breaks out we will have forces ready to take action; but under modern conditions the civil population must be prepared for survival operations, even if it is a war after the fashion of the second world war, with the awful destruction that was caused just by the conventional weapons of that period.
So it is sound common sense to have an emergency measures program, and even if it has not gone too well in some areas this is no excuse for not continuing the program on a national scale and with the co-operation of the provinces. A debt of gratitude is due to those people, the director and his staff, who have carried on during the past several years without any particular public recognition or any particular blare of trumpets, because this is a field of activity in which some people are interested and some are not. Nevertheless it is vital to Canada's welfare and I hope that it will continue without abatement so that we are ready for any emergency whatsoever.
I have one note that is not quite in keeping with all that has gone before. I had an argument with the Minister of National Defence as to the role of the militia with regard to this particular problem, and I presume I will have to wait until he reappears with his estimates to conclude that debate. I think he suggested that the minister reporting for emergency measures might have something to say about the role of the militia, but I would prefer to have it right from the mouth of the Minister of National Defence himself; so I will not press the minister, who perhaps has too many other things to do than to carry part of the burden for the Minister of National Defence.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Herman Maxwell Batten: This completes the estimates of the privy council.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.
Business of the House BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Gordon Minto Churchill: I would like to ask the
house leader to outline the business in front of us as far as he can go, with the hope that we will be able to complete this session and prorogue not later than the twentieth of this month. So far as we are concerned, the eighteenth would be even more satisfactory. We have now had two or three quiet days, so will the house leader produce some victims for slaughter?


John Whitney Pickersgill: As a matter of fact, sir, I do not like the idea of the last observation of the hon. gentleman in the context of what I am about to announce, but it was understood that we would take the estimates of the Department of Agriculture tomorrow. When they have been concluded and the carnage is over, the Postmaster General is only too ready to enter the slaughterhouse.
To take a more serious note, before we do either of these things I think my hon. friend, the Minister of National Health and Welfare, would like to move third reading of her bill tomorrow, which I hope will take a very brief time indeed because, as the hon. member for Perth pointed out, it is very important it should pass and get to the other place.
On Friday we would like to begin the day with the estimates of the Department of Justice, which have already had quite a thorough going over, and therefore should take a brief time. Then there will be the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, and after that various other departments which I will discuss with hon. members opposite; but we would not take any other new departments.
I believe, sir, and I come now to the really important point, that there would be agreement, and that an order to that effect might be made now-and I believe this from the consultations I have had-for the house to sit on Saturday from eleven o'clock in the morning to 1 p. m., and from 2.30 in the afternoon until six o'clock, and it should be understood that the rules that apply to Friday would apply to that Saturday, except of course that we would not have a private members' hour from five to six.
If this is agreeable to the house, then on Saturday we would begin with the estimates of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, which would be the only new department available. I hope the house would be agreeable to my arranging what other departments could be brought on after that. Perhaps the Minister of National Health and Welfare might be available. In any event, I think we could find plenty to do.

Supply-Items Passed
The Aciing Speaker (Mr. Batten): Is it
agreed that the house will sit on Saturday from the hour of eleven o'clock in the morning to 1 in the afternoon and from 2.30 to six o'clock?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: This is in accordance with the understanding we have had. We were anxious that if we sat on Saturday we would deal with a new department. The department that has been suggested suits our purposes, and on this basis we are prepared to agree and let it become an order of the house.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: We in this party also agree.


Gordon Minto Churchill: For the record, we have been in agreement for a long time to extend the hours and get on with the business.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre becomes more and more agreeable as Christmas approaches.


[Stage Direction]
It being eight minutes after seven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply this day:]
privy council.
1. Payment, notwithstanding anything in the Financial Administration Act or the Senate and House of Commons Act respecting the independence of parliament, to each member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada who is a minister for whom no salary or allowance in addition to the allowances under section 33 and section 44 of the Senate and House of Commons Act is provided (the acceptance of which shall not render such member ineligible or disqualify him as a member of the House of Commons) of a salary of $7,500 per annum and pro rata for any period less than a year, $7,500.
Privy council office-
5. General administration, $746,200.
5a. General administration, $10,000.
Prime Minister's residence-
10. Maintenance and operation, $24,500.
Special-
30. Expenses of the royal commission on health services including the payment, notwithstanding the Civil Service Act, of honoraria or allowances as may be authorized by the treasury board to
officers, clerks or employees permanently employed in the civil service for services rendered by them to the commission, $275,500.
35. Expenses of the royal commission on banking and finance including the payment, notwithstanding the Civil Service Act, of honoraria or allowances as may be authorized by the treasury board to officers, clerks or employees permanently employed in the civil service for services rendered by them to the commission, $199,300.
40. Expenses of the royal commission on taxation including the payment, notwithstanding the Civil Service Act, of honoraria or allowances as may be authorized by the treasury board to officers, clerks or employees permanently employed in the civil service for services rendered by them to the commission, $981,800.
40a. Expenses of the royal commission on taxation, $250,000.
42a. Expenses of the royal commission on pilotage including the payment, notwithstanding the Civil Service Act, or honoraria or allowances as may be authorized by the treasury board to officers, clerks or employees permanently employed in the civil service for services rendered by them to the commission, $301,220.
Emergency measures organization-
15. Administration and operation, $1,463,000.
20. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment including authority to make recoverable advances not exceeding in the aggregate the amounts of the shares of the governments of the provinces of the costs of joint programs, $2,420,000.
25. Grants to provinces and municipalities for civil defence and related purposes (formerly provided under Department of National Defence-comparable amount in 1962-63, $4,800,000), $5,300,000.
Special-
National centennial administration-
45. General administration, $250,000.
45a. General administration, $175,400.
50. Programs and projects of national significance including grants towards such programs and projects, $2,500,000.
55. Payment to the national centennial fund to enable grants to be made to the provinces for local projects of a lasting nature (the total of such grants not to exceed $1 per capita of population per province), $2,000,000.
60. National conference on Canada's centennial, $45,000.

[Stage Direction]
1. Office of the secretary to the Governor General, $233,200.
5. To authorize reimbursement to the lieutenant-governors of the provinces of Canada of the costs of travelling and hospitality incurred in the exercise of their duties up to a maximum per annum for each as detailed in the estimates, $129,000.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, December 12, 1963