1963-11-22

[Stage Direction]
Mr. G. W. Baldwin (Peace River) presented the second report of the standing committee on public accounts, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Eleventh report of standing committee on banking and commerce-Mr. Moreau.

Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a statement about the acquisition of aircraft by Trans-Canada Air Lines, and certain other matters related to aviation and the aircraft industry. This statement is somewhat longer than I and perhaps the house would wish, but I think this is justified in this case by the importance of the matter and the general interest it has aroused.
Trans-Canada Air Lines is today announcing that it is placing an order for six jet aircraft of the DC-9 type with the Douglas Aircraft Corporation. This decision has been reached by the board of directors of T.C.A. after a technical and economic evaluation of five different types of aircraft. A thorough review by the government disclosed no reason for directing T.C.A. to reconsider this decision.
The evaluation by T.C.A. was probably the most complete ever undertaken by an air line company, certainly by a Canadian company. The selection of an aircraft is a complex process in which many matters must be taken into account. The pattern of routes to be served, which is different for each air line, affects the calculation of both capital and operating costs. It also governs the assessment of alternative types of aircraft in relation to the stage lengths and distances, the frequency of service, and many other matters including maintenance, passenger comfort and speed.
If T.C.A. is to provide the best service to the Canadian public at the lowest possible
rates, it needs the type which is best suited to its own economic and operational requirements. T.C.A. has decided that the DC-9 best meets these requirements, on grounds of both cost and service to the public. This, of course, does not mean that the types not selected by T.C.A. are not good aircraft; rather it means that they are not as well suited to T.C.A.'s particular needs in this particular instance.
In studying the decision of T.C.A. the government has considered the impact which each of the alternative choices seemed likely to make on employment and industrial activity, and was concerned that, whatever type might be selected, Canadian industry should share in its manufacture. None of the types under consideration could have been built entirely in Canada; in each case engines and at least a number of component parts would have had to be brought into the country. However, the Douglas Aircraft Corporation had already entered into an arrangement with the de Havilland Corporation of Canada whereby a substantial portion of the DC-9 aircraft is to be produced by de Havilland of Canada.
This does not apply merely to aircraft produced for T.C.A., but to all DC-9 aircraft sold anywhere in the world. There should also be benefits to component manufacturers in Canada, both directly and indirectly. For example, United Aircraft of Canada Limited, in the Montreal area, is expected to receive many millions of dollars worth of business both on the engines installed in the DC-9 and on other work transferred to Canada concurrently by the parent company in the United States.
I am very pleased that the T.C.A. decision will result in the acquisition of an aircraft having an important Canadian component made by a Canadian company and providing substantial employment for Canadian labour. Indeed, with the T.C.A. order acting as a stimulus to the purchase of DC-9's by other air lines throughout the world, there is a very strong likelihood that the benefits to the Canadian economy in terms of labour and production, including foreign exchange gained, will be greater than the value of the T.C.A. order.
At the same time I am aware that much public discussion has centred on the possibility of production at the Canadair plant in Montreal of another type of aircraft for use by T.C.A. In this connection I wish to

Purchase of Aircraft
emphasize that the government has given special attention to the current and prospective levels of activity at Canadair, and I can assure the house that this company will continue to enjoy, as it has in the past, a substantial share of the aircraft production work carried out in Canada. At the present time Canadair is prime contractor to the Department of Defence Production for two major aircraft production programs. One of these is the F-104 Starfighter program. Having recently completed an order for 200 of these aircraft for the R.C.A.F., the firm is currently producing a further 140 for mutual aid, financed jointly by the United States and Canadian governments. The production of these aircraft at Canadair's plant at Cartier-ville is scheduled to continue until the autumn of 1965. In addition to these orders, under arrangements made by the Department of Defence Production, Canadair is sole supplier to Lockheed California Company of wings and tail assemblies for all aircraft of this type sold by Lockheed. The other production program in which Canadair is currently engaged is the CT-114 Tutor jet trainer. One hundred and ninety of these aircraft have been ordered by the R.C.A.F. Deliveries are scheduled to commence in December of this year and to continue through December, 1965.
Canadair has also received subcontracts from a number of United States defence contractors, largely as a result of the Canadian-United States production sharing program. An example, which holds excellent potential for continuing production, is the subcontract which the company has received from Convair division of General Dynamics for design and manufacture of part of the airframe of the F 111 TLX aircraft now being developed for the United States department of defence. Subcontracting has also enabled the company to diversify its activities by the manufacture of items ranging from valves for submarines to components for helicopters. In addition to its manufacturing, Canadair performs a continuing large annual volume of repair and overhaul work for the Canadian services under contracts with the Department of Defence Production.
In recognition of the fact that it is only through the development of new products that a company can hope to maintain a stable level of future production, the government has provided substantial assistance to Canadair both through the Department of Defence Production and under the defence industrial research program of the defence research board. Important development projects are under way at Canadair which have been made possible not only by the financial support of the government but also through

negotiations conducted by the Canadian government with other countries.
T.C.A.'s study of the purchase of new aircraft was made against the background of the corporation's forward plans for the next ten years. The effect of this planning is to indicate that much the greater part of T.C.A.'s fleet of turbo-propeller Viscount aircraft will continue to be needed throughout the ten years.
I am therefore now able to announce a change from the previous expectation, which was made known a year ago, that the overhaul and maintenance base in Winnipeg might begin to be phased out early in 1966. For at least as far ahead as planning now extends, that is at least ten years, the Winnipeg facilities will continue to be used.
This decision has considerable importance to the economy of greater Winnipeg. In the view of the government it is very much in the national interest that opportunities for skilled employment of the kind which the T.C.A. base provides should be diversified in different centres to as great an extent as is compatible with industrial efficiency. For this reason the continued operation of these maintenance and overhaul facilities in Winnipeg is to be warmly welcomed.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: The Prime Minister has made a very lengthy statement and it is, of course, impossible to analyse that statement without having the details before us. However, it indicates that the widespread division which, it has been suggested, existed within the cabinet has finally been resolved in favour of those who represent Ontario constituencies.
With regard to the lengthy explanation as to the benefits which will go to Canadair, all I can say is that it would appear, because the explanation was so long, that the potentialities for Canadair are much less than the hopes expressed today by the Prime Minister.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


An hon. Member:: Compared with the Avro.


John George Diefenbaker: I am very glad for that intervention, the statement regarding the Avro. Throughout the years we were condemned for the stand we took in connection with the cancellation of the Arrow program. It was a difficult decision to make. We only found out a matter of three weeks ago, when General Foulkes was giving evidence before the defence committee, that hon. gentlemen who now interrupt me had agreed on cancelling the Arrow program but had decided not to do so before the 1957 election.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I rise on a point of order.


John George Diefenbaker: There is no point of order. The statement which the right hon. gentleman-


Lester Bowles Pearson: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker.


John George Diefenbaker: If the right hon. gentleman wishes to rise on a point of order, may I say that it is in keeping with his usual course.


Lester Bowles Pearson: My point of order is that the statement which the Leader of the Opposition has just made is entirely inaccurate.


John George Diefenbaker: I wonder why the Prime Minister does not take some instructions from the so-called rule expert, the Secretary of State, who might point out to the right hon. gentleman that that is not a point of order. It is simply an interruption designed to cause a detour, but it will not succeed. I repeat what I said; the St. Laurent government had decided to cancel that program but he and his friends, including the present Prime Minister, agreed they would delay taking any action on this course, which they believed in the Canadian interest, because of their fear of the political effect.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, that is a false statement.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, the ruddiness of the face of the Prime Minister is understandable under all the circumstances.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: In so far as the announcement is concerned, naturally, as I said at the beginning, we will look at it and see what was actually said and what was meant by the large number of words that were used in the explanation. However, there is one definite announcement and that is regarding the Winnipeg situation. I am sure that will bring intense pleasure to the hon. member for Winnipeg South who for so long-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: -has pressed to have the base remain there.


Mr. Knowles:: I raise a point of order now.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I did not have a compass with me when I was describing the constituency, but so there will be no misunderstanding as to the identity of the person meant may I say I was referring to
Purchase of Aircraft
the former minister of national defence sit ting on my left. However, even that statement is not quite as clear as it might be. It does not indicate whether there is going to be any reduction in employment. It simply says that the overhaul base will be continued.
I hope that statement means that the playing around with this problem by the present government for so long has finally been ended-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: -for as far as we were concerned we gave the assurance that the base was not going to be interfered with.


Mr. Mcllrailh:: No.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquiilam):: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has made two very important announcements. There will be general pleasure at the announcement that the T.C.A. maintenance and overhaul base is to remain in Winnipeg for at least the foreseeable future. I think this is good not only for the economy of Winnipeg and Manitoba, but it is a good decision for the economy of Canada as a whole. I know it will bring a great deal of satisfaction to my two colleagues, the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre and the hon. member for Winnipeg North, who have done most of the work in advocating that the base should be maintained at Winnipeg. It will also relieve a certain Liberal candidate in Winnipeg, who is my namesake, of a good deal of his embarrassment over the commitment he made during the election. I think the decision is a good one and we welcome it.
With reference to the decision which the Prime Minister announced regarding the purchase of the DC-9, this is a complex and technical matter and we would want to examine the Prime Minister's statement more carefully. But I do want to say to him and to the government that while we want all the employment we can get in Canada, I think the Canadian people as a whole will deem it the government's responsibility to place the major emphasis on the safety of and service to the passengers who travel on T.C.A. and on the efficiency of Trans-Canada Air Lines. This must be the main consideration in making a decision of this magnitude. If the government, which is in full possession of the facts, has made a decision on the basis of that criterion, then I think they will have the wholehearted support of the people of the country.


Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Trans-Canada Air Lines has become one of the

Purchase of Aircraft
major air lines of the world, responsible for the safety and transportation of thousands of people each year. I am not sure if the reaction of the members of this house to the announcement just made is in keeping with the record and standards that have been set by T.C.A. I would say that Trans-Canada Air Lines is not responsible for the unemployment situation in Canada, nor should politicians be deciding what kind of aircraft T.C.A. should operate.
I am not an expert in aviation, but I fly by T.C.A. as much as anyone else and I have had considerable personal experience in flying as well. I must say that I feel it is a safer proposition to fly in an aircraft selected by technical people who know something about it than to fly in one that might be selected by politicians. Now, if the technical people of Trans-Canada Air Lines have decided that the DC-9 is the best type of aircraft to fly, and that in consideration of the economic operation of the air line it is also the best type to choose, then I think we should accept that decision because they have the responsibility for the decision.
However, it is encouraging to note that the unemployment situation in Montreal is not something which is just left to the wolves; because the announcement, as I have understood it, indicates there is going to be a considerable increase in the activities of Canadair and the aircraft construction industry in Montreal. I also welcome the decision to leave the maintenance depot in Winnipeg, at least for the foreseeable future, because its removal would work a hardship on a lot of people whose lives have been wrapped up in this particular phase of the industry at Winnipeg.
I should like to comment that it is now obvious that T.C.A. is entering into the field of pure jets. I am concerned about the number of feeder lines, which will not decrease but increase, I believe, and which probably are not in a position to use this type of aircraft. I urge the government to be very careful in their policies and in their considerations respecting the maintenance of these feeder lines, and to make sure that the service is extended to these areas. This provides an opportunity for private enterprise to co-operate with public enterprise in maintaining the essential transportation policies which the Canadian people require.
fTranslation]


Mr. Real Caouette (Villeneuve):: Mr. Speaker, the announcement just made by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Pearson) reminds me of someone who makes you take a dose of castor oil by offering you at the same time a spoonful of sugar.

I have absolutely no intention of discussing the report of the directors or the experts of T.C.A. who suggested the purchase of six DC-9 aircraft instead of Caravelle aircraft. The latter was widely spoken of and for a while it particularly interested government members from the province of Quebec and from other parts of Canada who decided in favour of the Caravelle instead of the DC-9.
According to experts, the Caravelle has already stood the test of experience, but not the DC-9.
The castor oil is referred to in this morning's Le Devoir which said:
By choosing the DC-9, Ottawa will deprive Quebec of a $55 million contract. Even if Ottawa chose the Caravelle, Toronto would build the DC-9.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I am a little amazed at the attitude of my hon. friends opposite who gave a real loud applause at the announcement made by the right hon. Prime Minister although they themselves demanded the purchase of the Caravelle for the whole of Canada or to meet the needs of T.C.A.
I repeat that there is no question of criticizing the decision of experts because they know what they are doing. But we must recognize that some experts chose the Caravelle while some others preferred the DC-9.
The spoonful of sugar is the announcement that the air base in Winnipeg will be operated for another ten years and that overhaul and maintenance operations will continue to be done there as in the past. I am glad of that.
As for Montreal, we are told that the Royal Canadian Air Force will award contracts to Canadair and that United Aircraft of Montreal will produce parts and accessories. The only thing is that the DC-9 will not be built in Montreal.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that the government cannot reverse its decision, but I should like to point out to the Prime Minister and to the members of his cabinet that Quebec has the highest level of unemployment at present and that every effort should be made to reduce the chronic unemployment which has been afflicting that province for years.
Millions of dollars of expenditures will have to be made for the production of those aircraft and the industrialization that will follow. I am all for the distribution of that money according to the needs of the provinces since Quebec will have its share, but I feel that the government should have favoured the less developed and less progressive areas.
We have to swallow the dose of castor oil. The spoonful of sugar makes it easier, but we still maintain that the government should have chosen the Caravelle instead of the DC-9.

On the orders of the day:


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Winnipeg South Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Transport whether he can give an assurance that the overhaul and maintenance work that will be required on the proposed new jets will be done at the base in Winnipeg.


George James McIlraith: No, Mr. Speaker.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport supplementary to the question put to him by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre. In view of the minister's statement that he could not assure that the work on the DC-9 would be done at Winnipeg, can he say, since the base is being maintained, what work will be done there and the extent of the employment that will be maintained at Winnipeg through the foreseeable future?


George James McIlraith: I wonder if I might suggest that before questions are asked on this subject the text of the statement made this morning be read carefully, because it deals with the point raised. This overhaul base situation has caused grave concern in Winnipeg because of conflicting statements and misinformation that got out before I had responsibility in the department. I am sure the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre will appreciate this. There were differences in announcements made by him in Winnipeg during the election campaign and statements made by the minister of transport of that day-


Gordon Minto Churchill: No, sir.


George James McIlraith: -and the T.C.A. officials announcements. This has become a matter of great worry to the people of Winnipeg.
The maintenance work that is envisaged, and this is related to the announcement made on the acquisition of new aircraft, is the work on the Viscount, and it will be seen on reading the statement that the announcement infers keeping the Viscount aircraft in operation, whereas the fears in Winnipeg arose from the fact that the Viscounts were being taken out of operation, starting early in 1966, with the closing of the base as that operation proceeded. Indeed it was indicated it would proceed rapidly.
I would ask hon. members to check the statement quite carefully, but it is predicated on the maintenance base continuing the same kind of work that it is doing now.


Gordon Minto Churchill: We will have to read the statement plus Hansard.
Purchase of Aircraft


George James McIlraith: And it is predicated on the planning involved in the purchase of aircraft, which is firm through to 1973.


Stanley Howard Knowles: As a supplementary question, may I ask the minister what will happen to the Winnipeg maintenance and overhaul base when the Viscount has been phased out? Is this assurance only for these few years?


Mr. Pickersgill:: It isn't going to be phased out for 10 years.


George James McIlraith: I think this should be put in perspective. The facts of the matter are that the announcement this morning dealt with employment for 10 years ahead; in the last 10 years employment in T.C.A. at Winnipeg has increased by 23 per cent. To go beyond the year 1973 in a definitive announcement as to the precise nature of work that would be done in a base doing overhaul and maintenance work would, in my view, be irresponsible.


Stanley Howard Knowles: During the 10 year period will employment be maintained more or less at the present level-


Lester Bowles Pearson: It may be increased.


Stanley Howard Knowles: -or will it be nibbled away as was the case during the last few years?


George James McIlraith: I would hope it would be maintained and probably increased, but I cannot be precise on the matter at the moment.


Mr. Lloyd Francis (Carlelon):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister. In view of the reference to General Foulkes earlier today in this chamber, is the Prime Minister in possession of any further information or reports concerning the course of action then taken?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, shortly after General Foulkes appeared before the defence committee he visited me to protest at the interpretation which had been given to his evidence. I asked him, if that were the case, whether he would send me an exact transcript of what he had said, and-


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Either this is in order or it is not in order, but these self-explanatory statements in answer to suggested questions are not in keeping with the rules of this house.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, this question arises out of a statement made a few minutes ago by the right hon. gentleman, which is now on the record and will have been reported. Therefore I think

Purchase of Aircraft
in justice to General Foulkes, who cannot speak for himself in this house, the question is in order and I should be able to put on the record in answer to the question exactly what he said.


John George Diefenbaker: I again rise on a point of order and ask for your ruling, Mr. Speaker. If the hon. gentleman wants to revert to motions in order to make a self-exculpatory statement I have no objection, but this is no place for this kind of infraction of the rules.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, continuing my answer to the question-


John George Diefenbaker: No. I ask for a ruling here, instead of this contemptuous attitude on the part of the Prime Minister.


Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order to bring to the attention of the house the fact that the right hon. gentleman knows full well that when he is dealing with a matter concerning a statement made by a minister in this house, he must deal with that statement and with nothing extraneous to it. In his statement the right hon. gentleman opposite dealt with a matter which was entirely extraneous-


Mr. Monleith:: Who started it? The Prime Minister.


Lionel Chevrier: Just a moment. That part of his statement was totally out of order. I remember full well how we when on the other side of the house were called to order at any time-


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


John George Diefenbaker: It was the interruption which called for an answer from me.


Mr. Speaker:: It is a new experience for me to have to interrupt two hon. members who are ministers, but I do think the point is reasonably well taken that if the statement is a long statement we should revert to motions.


Lester Bowles Pearson: The statement is in reply to a question which was asked in view of what the right hon. gentleman said about a particular man. It is a very short statement. Reference to the verbatim evidence which was given will clear this matter up, out of fairness to General Foulkes, and it will take about 30 seconds to make it.


John George Diefenbaker: If this is a reversion to motions I have no objection whatsoever, but this present course is improper.


Lionel Chevrier: So was your statement.


John George Diefenbaker: It is improper to place before the house questions arising in connection with statements made to a committee.


Mr. Speaker:: May I refer hon. members to Beauchesne's fourth edition, citation 181(1):
Questions must be answered briefly and distinctly, and be limited to the necessary explanations, though a certain latitude is permitted to members ot the crown whenever they find it necessary to extend their remarks with the view of clearly explaining the matter in question.
In view of the fact that it is the Prime Minister who is making this request a certain latitude should be given, but I would have to leave it up to his good taste to restrict the latitude as much as possible.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, there is another point of order which I think Your Honour must consider and which has not yet been placed before you. If the Prime Minister is about to straighten out something which took place in a committee of the house, I submit he is out of order because that committee has not yet reported. If the Prime Minister wishes to deal with that matter I suggest he had better find some way of doing so which is within the rules.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I am not dealing with this matter because of anything which arose in the committee but because of a reference made in the house to a statement which was made in that committee, a reference which I claim was inaccurate. I am trying to clear up that inaccuracy. That is all I have in mind.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If the Leader of the Opposition was out of order in referring to what went on in the committee he should have been ruled out of order at the time; but if he was not ruled out of order, that does not make it proper for the Prime Minister to pursue a line which is out of order.


John George Diefenbaker: I was not out of order.
I was making a statement when I was interrupted. It was one of those interruptions made by an hon. member sitting in his place; "What about the Arrow". I answered it, and the answer hurt.


Mr. Speaker:: I suggest that in order to permit this discussion to continue, if the Prime Minister would like to revert to motions and the house gave its consent, we could follow that procedure-


Gordon Minto Churchill: On a point of order, the Prime Minister indicated that he was about to read a verbatim report of what was said in the committee. The committee has not reported to the House of Commons; therefore he would not be in order in doing such a thing. It is on that point that Your Honour would have to rule.


George James McIlraith: I wonder if might be heard on the point of order. I think it might be helpful if I read the question which was asked. The question is "In view of the reference made to General Foulkes, has the Prime Minister a report of what the general actually said about the Arrow cancellation?". It is clear that the answer was to be what the general actually said, as disclosed to the Prime Minister; because General Foulkes was concerned with the information which had appeared in the press of Canada, concerned with what he felt was a mistake. So I suggest the approach made by the right hon. Prime Minister is in order.


Mr. Speaker:: If the Prime Minister could give a short answer without referring to what went on in the committee he might be in order.


Lester Bowles Pearson: What I propose to do in answering this question is to repeat what General Foulkes told me. He said, and he gave me a copy of his evidence-


Some hon. Members:: Oh.


Lester Bowles Pearson: But to end this matter, if hon. members opposite do not wish to have on the record the exact words he used, as given to me by him in my office, I do not wish to delay the house and I will see that the information is given to the press.


Some hon. Members:: They are afraid of the truth.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I rise on a question of privilege. The remarks just made by members of the other side of the house were not directed toward me, but I object to any suggestion that when members insist that the rules be observed it is because they are afraid of the truth. There is no one in this house who insists more regularly on the observance of the rules than the Secretary of State. But citation 324 (1) of Beauchesne's fourth edition specifically states:
Until the report and evidence has been laid upon the table it is irregular to refer to them in debate or to put questions in reference to the proceedings of the committee.
I suggest that the decision made by Your Honour and by the house, that we should not hear this statement, was one which was reached purely on the basis of the observance of the rules and not on the substance of the matter before us.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I also suggest that if General Foulkes has been misunderstood, or if his evidence before the defence committee has been misinterpreted, he has a perfect right to ask the chairman of that committee to allow him to appear again and correct any
Purchase of Aircraft
misunderstanding with regard to his comments.

On the orders of the day:


Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolielie-L'Assompfion-Montcalm):: Mr. Speaker, may I put a question to the Prime Minister?
Following his statement concerning the purchase of the DC-9 aircraft, can the Prime Minister tell the house whether T.C.A. has called for tenders from the French company which developed the Caravelle?


Lester Bowles Pearson: If the hon. member would read the statement I made, he would find the answer to his question.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. [Translation]


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, may I put a supplementary question?
In his lengthy statement the Prime Minister did not say whether T.C.A. had called for tenders from the company which developed the Caravelle aircraft.
Following the long statement he just made, the Prime Minister must be in a position to answer me. That is why I am asking this question.


Hon. J. P. Deschatelets (Minister of Public Works):: Just read the Prime Minister's statement.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for St. Mary.


Mr. Georges Valade (St. Mary):: Thank you for recognizing me at last, Mr. Speaker. I wish to direct my question either to the Minister of Transport or to the Prime Minister. Since the Prime Minister answers in certain cases and the Minister of Transport in others, I will let the two hon. gentlemen choose between themselves who is to reply.
In all the arguments which were brought up in the statement by the Prime Minister as to comfort, speed, service and cost, I heard nothing about safety. Can the minister make a statement as to the comparative safety of both the Caravelle and the DC-9? This is a point which is of major importance.


John Whitney Pickersgill: On a point of order, I suggest that the rules be applied to both sides of the house. There is a rule that questions must be succinct, that they should not contain arguments and that they should be directed to one particular minister. Since we seem to be in a mood to observe the rules this morning, I suggest they be applied with respect to this question.

Purchase of Aircraft


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: You are the king of arguments.


Georges-J. Valade: On the point of order, I wish to read some remarks made by the Secretary of State and say that I did not know to which minister I should direct my question, because the responsibility for a decision-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I am sure we understood the point of the hon. member's question, and I think we have dealt with it.


Georges-J. Valade: May I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Transport. Has the minister any statement to make concerning the safety of the DC-9?


George James McIlraith: Yes. I wish to assure the hon. member that Trans-Canada Air Lines made a most careful evaluation over a period of about two years through their engineers and other persons working on the economic aspects of its operations. They went into the whole question of safety as well as the other relevant factors which are involved in a decision to purchase a new aircraft.


Georges-J. Valade: How many test flight hours-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. That is a question for the order paper.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: May I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Transport.


Mr. Speaker:: I wonder if the hon. member would wait. I have recognized the hon. member for Medicine Hat.

On the orders of the day:


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Now that the government has decided to buy DC-9 aircraft, does not the Prime Minister feel that it would be logical for Liberal members from Quebec to give their resignations as soon as possible in order to protest against that decision?


Georges-J. Valade: I should like to ask the Prime Minister if he can tell us on what date the contract was signed for the purchase of the DC-9 by Trans-Canada.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I do not think it has been signed yet.



SIR JOHN A. MACDONALD PROPOSED HOLIDAY IN HONOUR OF FORMER PRIME MINISTER

Mr. Heath Macquarrie (Queens) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-109, respecting Sir John A. Macdonald day.
[Mr. Pickersglll.l


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: Mr. Speaker, as Canadians approach the centennial of the Charlottetown and Quebec conferences and soon of confederation itself, it seems proper and desirable that the memory of the chief architect of confederation, Sir John A. Macdonald, be honoured by the observance of a holiday bearing his illustrious name. This bill proposes such a holiday on the Monday following his birthday, January 11.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



REDISTRIBUTION


John Whitney Pickersgill: that the house do go into committee of the whole at its next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution, which has been recommended to the house by His Excellency:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure respecting the office of representation commissioner and to define the duties of the commissioner under the said measure, in addition to those assigned to him under the Canada Elections Act and under a measure to provide for the establishment of electoral boundaries commissions to report upon the readjustment of the representation of the provinces in the House of Commons and to provide for the readjustment of such representation in accordance therewith: to provide for the salary and expenses of the commissioner; to provide for the appointment of a substitute commissioner and for the payment of his salary and expenses; to authorize the commissioner to appoint such officers and employees as are necessary for the conduct of his office and to engage on a temporary basis persons having technical or specialized knowledge of matters relating to the work of the commissioner; to increase the salary of the chief electoral officer of Canada and to effect certain other changes in the Canada Elections Act consequential upon the said measure, and to provide for the payment out of the consolidated revenue fund under the authority of the said measure of all amounts required for the payment of salary and other expenses under the said measure and under the measure to provide for the establishment of electoral boundaries commissions, including expenses of administration thereunder.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the right hon. Prime Minister whether he is in a position to give any further report regarding the situation of the Canadians at present imprisoned in Cuba and awaiting trial; and whether he has decided on the course suggested by me yesterday, of communicating directly with Premier Castro?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, as the house would expect, we are of course following this matter as closely as possible. The Secretary of State for External Affairs saw the Cuban ambassador last night and has been in telephonic communication with our own embassy in Cuba, and our ambassador in Cuba has seen the foreign minister there. I am sure hon. members of the house recognize that the government, from the cabinet to the officials concerned in the Department of External Affairs and in our embassy in Havana, have from the beginning of this case felt the gravest concern for the welfare of these two men. We have taken and will continue to take every step that we think can be of assistance to them. Our views on all aspects of the arrest and the prospective trial have, as I have already indicated to the house, been repeatedly conveyed to the Cuban government through every channel which is open to us.
If we thought it would be helpful to the two accused to tell the house in detail what has been said between the Canadian and Cuban governments, my colleague the Secretary of State for External Affairs and I would have done so before this, and would do so now. But I ask the house and my right hon. friend the Leader of the Opposition, who I know shares our grave concern, not to press me for a further statement this morning. The trial is scheduled for tomorrow, and we hope and earnestly pray that our anxiety will have been relieved before the house reassembles on Monday.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I am not allowed to make a comment at this time, excepting that I should be permitted to say that the house joins with the Prime Minister in the expression of the view that nothing be done that would in any way hamper or cause potential difficulties. I would, however.-* circumscribed by the Prime Minister's suggestion, which I entirely accept-ask the Prime Minister, without requiring an answer, to make representation to the government of Cuba that whatever the sentences, they be not summarily carried into effect, so that further steps might be taken, if necessary through the United Nations.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I appreciate very much the attitude of my right hon. friend and of other members of the house on this matter, and I can assure him the single point he has just mentioned has been made abundantly clear to the Cuban government on more than one occasion by the Secretary of State for External Affairs.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I want to direct a question to the Minister of Justice, but before doing so
28902-5-322
External Affairs
I might just say to the Prime Minister that I hope he can convey to the government of Cuba the great concern of the parliament of Canada and make a special appeal to them that if the death sentence is passed it will be delayed. The Cuban government must understand that all parties in this house take a very grave view of this situation, and that any appearance of injustice in the treatment of these men would certainly cause a serious situation to develop in the relations between our two countries.


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of Slate for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has suggested that I might deal with this question. I want to say that having talked to our ambassador in Havana last night, I am satisfied that the viewpoint which has been expressed from time to time in this house and in the country has been brought home strongly by our ambassador to the foreign minister of Cuba and to the government of that country.


John George Diefenbaker: And to Castro personally?


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I am sure all hon. members will be glad to know that. I think it will strengthen the Canadian government's hand if the Cuban government knows the people of Canada are concerned, and that it would be injurious to the good relations between our two countries if any action were taken that smacked of injustice or was peremptory.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, in view of the comment of the Leader of the Opposition I would just say I have not commented on his interjection for the reasons mentioned in the statement of the Prime Minister.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I wonder if, by unamimous consent, I could make a statement on the situation regarding the Canadian prisoners in Cuba. It has just been handed to me as a result of a message received from Havana.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Since answering questions earlier this morning, I have now received a message from the Canadian ambassador in Havana which enables me to add to what I said a few minutes ago. Our ambassador called again this morning on the Cuban foreign minister, who gave him the following formal assurances which I quote from the English translation. They were given in Spanish:
The Cuban government has assured the Canadian government that it is taking and will take into special consideration the Canadian government's interest in the case of the Canadian pilots held under arrest and awaiting trial accused of very serious offences for which Cuban law sanctions capital punishment.

Inquiries of the Ministry If the Canadian pilots were to be condemned to death the Cuban government assures the Canadian government that it would give special attention to any appeal which the Canadian government might put forward on behalf of the pilots.
This is the end of the quotation. We cannot prejudge the issue of the trial, of course, even on the basis of this message. However, if there should be-I put this as a purely hypothetical proposition-a sentence of death the ambassador will immediately, on behalf of the government, make an appeal to the Cuban government at the highest possible level that the death sentence be commuted, if in fact a death sentence is imposed.



PENITENTIARIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, the question I wanted to direct to the Minister of Justice arises out of the trial of three men in connection with the disturbance at the New Westminster penitentiary. The jury made several recommendations, one of which was that an independent investigation be conducted into conditions at the New Westminster penitentiary. Is the minister's department prepared to undertake such an independent investigation?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that when the presiding judge at a trial receives recommendations of this nature he forwards them to the Minister of Justice with his comments. Of course my hon. friend realizes I have not received them yet. When I do receive them, the recommendations will be given consideration.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: As a supplementary question, when the minister has received them and has made a decision, will he acquaint the house with his decision in this regard?


Lionel Chevrier: I see no objection to that.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert Norman Thompson: Mr. Speaker, I direct my question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In view of the greatly increased interest in the conference on smoking and cancer, would the hon. lady have changed her mind since yesterday regarding the press attending the conference and letting the public have maximum information?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Minisier of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, after the representations which were made in the house during the last couple of days, I had occasion yesterday to go back through the correspondence, and I found that in sending out invitations some months ago, particularly to representatives of the provincial governments, I undertook that the conference would be held in camera. I therefore feel I cannot make any attempt to have the press present. However, if representatives of the provinces should decide at the opening of the conference that they wish it to be open to the press, I would certainly be prepared to go along with that.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, my question is meant for the Minister of National Defence, but as he is not in the house at the moment, I shall direct it to the Prime Minister. Could the Prime Minister confirm or deny the item published by Le Devoir this morning and according to which children of the Canadian military personnel posted in Europe are taught exclusively in English?


Hon. Lucien Cardin (Associate Minisier of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, I had occasion recently to go and visit our troops in Europe and I have visited the schools where the children of our military personnel are taught. I can assure my hon. friend that there are bilingual schools, and that children may learn the French language in all of our schools in Europe.


David Réal Caouette: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Could the Associate Minister of National Defence tell us whether these bilingual schools are maintained by the Department of National Defence, or if they are those of the European countries concerned?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Speaker, I may tell my hon. friend that these schools are operated by the Department of National Defence, which hires the necessary staff.


Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapoinfe):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a supplementary question on that point to the Associate Minister of National Defence. When he speaks of bilingual schools, does he mean schools where all the teaching is done in English, except for one or two hours a day devoted to the teaching of French, as is done in English

schools of the country where just a smattering of French is taught?



LOUNGES FOR SECRETARIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. O. W. Weichel (Waterloo North):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. Has he given any consideration to the matter of lounges for secretaries in the parliament buildings, and also for recreation facilities for members of parliament and the press in the suggested location in the west block?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: I am afraid I shall have to take this question as notice.



CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION OF SASKATCHEWAN POOL

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Reynold Rapp (Humboldt-Melfort-Tisdale):: Mr. Speaker, my question is
directed to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Has the Minister of Trade and Commerce taken note of the resolutions approved by the delegates of the Saskatchewan wheat pool at their recent annual meeting, urging support for the two price system for Canadian wheat; or, if this system were not implemented, for annual acreage payments; or that the wheat pool continue to press for a better share of the national income for agriculture? If so, would the minister have any comments to make on this resolution?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I am sure the hon. member can put that into more capsule form.


Reynold Rapp: Mr. Speaker, on a point of privilege, this is a very important question. I am sure the Minister of Trade and Commerce is prepared to answer some of these questions.


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I understood very well the question put by the hon. member. I gathered he asked what comment I had to make about the resolutions passed by the Saskatchewan wheat pool at its recent annual meeting. There were many of them and the hon. member mentioned some. May I say to the hon. gentleman that I was present at the annual meeting of the Saskatchewan wheat pool and I discussed some of these resolutions at the time. I have not yet seen the final text, but I can assure him that when these resolutions are received they will receive most careful attention.
28902-5-322J
Inquiries of the Ministry



INQUIRY AS TO INTERIM PAYMENT ON

[Stage Direction]
1962-63 crop
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lawrence Watson (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. I note that he has been speaking to the wheat board recently, and I wonder whether it is the intention of the wheat board to make an interim payment on the 1962-63 crop before January 1, 1964?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I cannot answer that question directly, but I did have a discussion with the Canadian wheat board on the question of further payments. They have the matter under consideration, and a payment will be made as soon as it is possible to close out the accounts and do it in the ordinary way.



CRITERIA GOVERNING FINANCING UNDER EXPORT CREDITS INSURANCE ACT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mitchell William Sharp: May I also answer two other questions. One submitted to me yesterday by the hon. member for Esquimalt-Saanich which concerns the basic criteria governing long term financing under section 21A of the Export Credits Insurance Act. The established policy is to finance substantial orders of $2 million or more for capital goods in cases where long terms are necessary to win the export orders. Although no orders for boats or ships have yet been financed, they would not be ineligible. Constant consideration is being given to ways of improving the facilities and adapting them more effectively to the needs of Canadian industries seeking business in export markets. The question of the $2 million minimum amount and the question of adapting the rules to benefit small manufacturers are among the matters constantly being reviewed.



PROPOSED PROHIBITION OF IMPORT INTO NEW YORK STATE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mitchell William Sharp: The other day the hon. member for Villeneuve addressed a question to the Prime Minister in the absence of the Minister of National Revenue, and I think the question should have been addressed to me. The hon. member asked whether the Prime Minister was aware of a bill introduced in the legislative assembly of the state-of New York with a view to prohibiting the importation of Canadian bread in that state-

Inquiries of the Ministry
I have now been advised that a bill to amend New York state health laws, which in essence would prohibit the importation of Canadian bread into New York state, has been pre-filed, which is the usage in that assembly. The legislature does not reopen until January 8 and copies of pre-filed bills are not available for distribution until, or just before, the sessions begin. Not all prefiled bills reach the floor of the legislature and I am assured by some of my informants that this one is not likely to. At any rate, I can assure hon. members that the progress of this pre-filed bill will be watched carefully.



WHEAT AND FLOUR


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. A. Olson (Medicine Hat):: I should like to address a completely non-controversial question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce.


An hon. Member:: Why ask it, then?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: My question arises out of the fact that we are now approaching the end of the shipping season. I should like to know whether our commitments with regard to the wheat deal with Russia and the other iron curtain countries are now back on schedule according to the agreement. Perhaps the minister could also tell us whether the commitments with regard to flour have been met.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity of having a personal discussion with the chairman of the Canadian wheat board at the beginning of this week, and he assured me that to his knowledge all commitments undertaken by the Canadian wheat board and by the flour millers have been fulfilled. I do not really think that even during the interruptions of shipping there was in fact any default of any kind.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. R. Garland (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Regina City asked me for a breakdown of loan applications for the fall program of direct C.M.H.C. loans for home owners by provinces. I have asked the corporation about this, and I am now in a position to tell the hon. member the number of applications received between September 23


and November 15, was as follows: Newfoundland, 55; Nova Scotia, 70; Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick, 78; Quebec, 4,023; Ontario, 4,681; Manitoba, 625; Saskatchewan, 553; Alberta, 2,306; British Columbia, 756. That makes a total of 13,147.



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: I wonder if I could now direct a non-controversial question to the Minister of Fisheries and ask him whether at an early opportunity, on motions, he could make a statement to the house of a reportorial nature about the meetings of the advisory committee of the north Pacific fisheries commission.


Hon. H. J. Robichaud (Minister of Fisheries):: My estimates have only partly been dealt with by the committee, and when they are considered by the committee again I will be prepared to make the statement requested.



PROVINCIAL REQUEST THAT FOREIGN SHIPS LAND FISH IN CANADA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. S. Barnett (Comox-Alberni):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries. I should like to know whether the government has received any request from one of the provinces that foreign vessels be allowed to land fish in Canada for processing. If so, has the government made any policy decision in this connection?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Yes, Mr. Speaker, a request has been received to that effect. The reply given was that the government would abide by the existing regulations under which no foreign vessel is entitled to land fish in Canada.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I should like to direct a further question to the Minister of Fisheries. Will the minister tell the house which province made the request to which I referred in my earlier question.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: In so far as I can recall, such a request was received from the province of Newfoundland.


Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (Queens-Lunenburg):: May I direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries. Will the minister inform the house the name of the country that wished to land and process fish in Newfoundland?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Mr. Speaker, I believe that a number of countries have expressed their desire to land fish in Newfoundland

and in other provinces of Canada. Amongst those countries were Japan and Spain.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Raymond Langlois (Megantic):: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to direct my question to the Minister of Agriculture, but I gather he must be away displaying his auctioneering talents, so I will direct my question to the Prime Minister. Did the government receive any representations from other eastern provinces on behalf of the eastern farmers besides the memoire presented by the farmers' union of Quebec a few weeks ago?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I will be glad to look into that matter.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE CONSIDERATION OF EDUCATION OF INDIAN CHILDREN

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. S. J. Korchinski (Mackenzie):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration with reference to the coming dominion-provincial conference. Will the subject of the education of Indian children come up? I am referring particularly to those areas where a joint provincial-federal responsibility lies. Will this question be discussed at the conference?


Hon. Guy Favreau (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, all I can say at the moment is that the general subject of Indian affairs, including the relation between the provinces and the federal government and their respective responsibilities, present and eventual in respect thereof, is on the agenda.



DEFENCE PRODUCTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. Russell MacEwan (Pictou):: Mr. Speaker, I have a short question for the Minister of Industry. Can the minister confirm or deny the press reports that Lufthansa will not purchase the CL-44 aircraft made at Canadair?


Hon. C. M. Drury (Minister of Industry):: Mr. Speaker, I do not think that Lufthansa has reached any firm conclusion. The Department of Defence Production is making every effort it can to assist Canadair in selling the CL-44 aircraft abroad.
Inquiries of the Ministry BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE



CONSIDERATION OF ESTIMATES OF DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the house leader. For the guidance of the committee of the whole house in studying the estimates today, would he let us know the order in which the various departments and agencies that come under the Minister of Industry will be taken up?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. gentleman for giving me notice of this question. I think it would perhaps help the house when we reach orders of the day if I were to indicate that the Minister of Industry considers it might suit everyone's convenience if the item on the Department of Industry were called first and it was understood that a general debate over the whole range of the activities for which he is responsible to the house could take place on that item. There would be no disposition on his part to seek any narrow interpretation of the rules. When the other items were reached it would be understood that they would be dealt with strictly according to the rules, which is usual with ordinary departments but is rather difficult in his case and in the case of one or two other ministers who have several agencies.
The various branches of public activity that the minister has to answer for are the Department of Industry, atomic energy, the Department of Defence Production, the national research council and the department of public printing and stationery. The minister thought he might take them in that order, but if any considerable number of members felt after the general debate that they would prefer to have a different order followed, the minister is a very agreeable member of the house and I am quite sure he would be glad to try to accommodate.
Perhaps I could go beyond answering that question in order to say that I indicated two other departments that would be available when his estimates and those of northern affairs are finished, but for personal reasons on the part of the ministers it is difficult for them to be here. Therefore my colleague the Minister of Labour will be available to fill in until 10.30 if he should be required.



EDUCATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a succinct and
5064	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry direct question to the Prime Minister. It is based on an inquiry this morning from the alma mater society of a university in British Columbia for the latest information as to when the house and the country can expect an announcement with regard to the government's promised scholarship program.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I should like to give a succinct and direct answer to that question, and I have given it before-as soon as possible.



REDISTRIBUTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Secretary of State. In the light of the story appearing in this morning's Globe and Mail written by Bernard Dufresne, could the Secretary of State inform the house as to the government's plans, or what the government proposes to ask the house to do in the field of redistribution? When the Secretary of State gets to his feet perhaps he might deal with two aspects, the machinery for redistribution that the government has in mind and the question of whether there is to be an increase in the membership of the house so there will not be a loss of seats in some of the provinces.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Very briefly, Mr. Speaker, a government notice of motion has been brought forward today. If the house is agreeable it is proposed to take it early next week and also a bill of which I hope to give notice before six o'clock today, which will have an outline of the scheme for redistribution.


Mr. Bell:: Scheme?


Some hon. Members:: Scheme?


John Whitney Pickersgill: A plan, a proposal. In respect of this matter I might say it is the view of the government that this is a constitutional responsibility imposed upon the whole of parliament for which the government, of course, has to take the initiative because it is the government, but which it is our collective duty to discharge in the best possible way. It is not the intention of the government to be insistent beyond the point of principle with which I think the house agrees, that we should have an independent, non-partisan redistribution by persons other than members of the House of Commons. It is not the intention of the government to insist in any way on any of the particulars of these bills, and any suggestions for improvements or


amendments would be considered on their merits. It is the house, of course, that is going to decide these matters and not any part of the house.
As to the other question, I may say that the government has no plans now-we will have to see how the house feels about it- as to amendments to the British North America Act.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, the use of the word "scheme" by the hon. gentleman was scarcely in keeping with his subsequent remarks, but I am sure that was just an inadvertence. There is no foundation, then, for the report that the government intends to suggest to the house that the number of seats should be 286, which I believe was the number mentioned in the article?


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is no foundation for that. The right hon. gentleman is quite correct in saying that I used a word that was perhaps unfortunate, but it was also used in connection with the British commonwealth air training scheme, of which most of us were pretty proud some years ago.



COMBINES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Justice. Has the Department of Justice received a brief from Provincial Motors Limited of Halifax, Nova Scotia, claiming that pressure has been brought to bear on this firm by Canadian Petrofina Limited to raise their prices? If so, is the restrictive trade practices commission investigating this complaint, and will the minister keep the house informed regarding the outcome of this investigation?


Lionel Chevrier: My understanding is that a brief has been received by the director under the Combines Investigation Act. As my hon. friend knows, over the years it has been the practice not to give any information concerning an inquiry until a report has been handed down by the restrictive trade practices commission.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: May I ask a supplementary question. Can the house have the minister's assurance that this matter will be investigated very promptly and aggressively?


Lionel Chevrier: I can give the assurance that the matter is in the hands of the director and will be given every attention.

Supply-Industry LABOUR RELATIONS



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Maurice Cole (Chicouiimi):: Mr. Speaker,
I should like to ask the Minister of Finance a question of which I gave him notice. Would the minister tell the house whether it is true that the Conservative government borrowed $250 million without interest from the Bank of Canada in 1962 and that this amount was credited to the account of the consolidated revenue fund?


Hon. Waller L. Gordon (Minister of Finance):: I thank my hon. friend for giving me notice of this question. It is not a fact that the previous government borrowed $250 million from the Bank of Canada. It is a fact, however, that it was announced in September, 1962, that the government of that day was borrowing $250 million from some New York banks at 5 per cent interest for a period of 25 years.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Raymond Langlois: Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I intended asking a question of the Minister of Labour, but he was momentarily out of the house and the Prime Minister sort of pinch-hit for him. However, he rather sidestepped the answer, so I am going to direct my question to the minister this morning. Can the minister tell the house when he intends to apply some of the Gill report recommendations in order to prevent some of the trouble the unemployed now have with the unemployment insurance commission?


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minisler of Labour):: I have nothing to add to what was said by the Prime Minister yesterday or to what I said on this subject on my estimates some days ago.



TRANS-CANADA AIR LINES MANUFACTURE IN TORONTO OF PARTS FOR DC-9 PLANES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George James McIlraith: Yesterday the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm asked a question concerning the manufacture of aircraft parts. The answer to his question is no.



TRUSTEESHIP LEGISLATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a question of the Minister of Justice, and I hope it is not inappropriate. Can the minister report to the house the status of the hearing for an injunction against the trusteeship; and could he tell us whether, in the meantime, there is any question about the authority of the trustees? I am referring to the trusteeship over the maritime unions.


Lionel Chevrier: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday there was an interlocutory motion which was heard in Montreal testing the validity of the act which was passed by parliament, not on its merits but from the point of view of an interim injunction. The judge before whom the motion was made took it under advisement. I believe it will be some weeks before he hands down a decision. In the meantime, the act which was passed by parliament affecting the trustees and the duties and responsibilities of the trustees, I should say, is in no way affected by this motion.

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



DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY

[Stage Direction]
Id. Department administration, $665,000.
Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, I did not hear what you said. Would you please identify this vote, the page it is on, and so on?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Perhaps I might be of some assistance in this regard, Mr. Chairman.


The Chairman:: This vote is to be found on page 3 of the supplementary estimates "D".


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: As the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre pointed out last night, there are only some eight days, including today-


Gordon Minto Churchill: "South Centre".


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre; excuse me. As he pointed out, there are only eight days remaining for examination of the estimates; consequently, as the house leader suggested, I will make a relatively short, general statement covering a number of departments, indicate where they will be found in the estimates book, the order in which we will be considering them, and if the house is agreeable I will suggest that a general discussion on the affairs of all these departments be undertaken initially under item 1 of the Department of Industry.

Supply-Industry
Following that we will have a detailed discussion, with the support of the officials, under each of the departments, seriatim. That is, a general discussion in relation to all the departments would take place, following which there would be a detailed discussion on each of the departments in order, under each of the votes.
The departments to be considered would be the Department of Industry, item 1, which is supplementary estimates "D" on page 3; following that atomic energy, which is in the main estimates at page 40; following that, the Department of Defence Production, in the main estimates at page 82; following that the national research council, in the main estimates at page 275; following that, the department of public printing and stationery, in the main estimates at page 335.
As hon. members will recall, the Department of Industry was established on July 25 this year in accordance with the act passed earlier in the session, and it was at that time discussed in some detail. For that reason it does not appear necessary for me to again go over the proposed duties and functions of this department, but I might describe briefly the progress which has been made since that time in setting up the establishment.
In discussing the setting up of the department it is perhaps useful to distinguish three separate phases; (1) organizational planning (2) staff recruiting and (3) operations. There is some overlapping of activities under each of these headings, naturally; but for our purposes today I think the committee will find this classification useful.
The first phase-that is, organizational planning-is now essentially complete for the Department of Industry. During the past four months a great deal of effort has been devoted to the preparation of detailed organizational plans, and the result is that the Department of Industry will consist of ten main functional branches, which are aircraft, chemicals, clothing and textiles, electrical and electronics, food products, machinery, materials, mechanical transport, shipbuilding, and wood products.
The organization of the Department of Defence Production is being altered in certain respects so that the operational structure of the Department of Industry and of the Department of Defence Production will be parallel. As a matter of fact the director of each Department of Industry branch will also be the director of the equivalent branch of the Department of Defence Production. These directors will be responsible to both the Department of Industry and the Department of Defence Production, and with this dual responsibility will be able to co-ordinate

the activities of both departments in each industrial field. Legal, financial, personnel and other staff services are being provided to the Department of Industry by the appropriate officers now on the staff of the Department of Defence Production. These units, which are now in operation and have been for some time, can absorb very much more easily the impact of the new department's work than could newly created units. Furthermore, this arrangement will avoid unnecessary and consequently wasteful duplication.
The new department is now actively engaged in the activities which come under the heading of staffing and recruiting. At this point the deputy minister, as the Prime Minister announced, has been appointed, as have two assistant deputy ministers who, incidentally, in a way similar to that of the branch directors, will have dual responsibilities in regard to both the Department of Industry and the Department of Defence Production.
The directors of the present defence production aircraft, electrical and electronics, and shipbuilding branches have been appointed directors of the equivalent branches in the Department of Industry. Candidates for the positions of directors for the other branches are currently being interviewed, and we expect that these appointments will be made in the course of the next few weeks. The commissioner of the area development agency, Mr. Lavigne, and the deputy commissioner, Mr. Teeter, have been appointed and the recruiting of officers to staff the agency is now under way. In addition, the staff of the domestic commerce branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce has been transferred to, and is now working in, the Department of Industry. We expect that the recruiting and appointment of staff will be substantially complete by the end of the current fiscal year, and at that time the department should be on the way to being fully operational.
On the financial side it will be seen in supplementary estimates "D" that the total vote is in the amount of $665,000. Of this the major proportion, that is $535,000, is for salaries and wages. Most of the amount for salaries, that is $475,000, is for personnel who are expected to be appointed to the department between now and the end of the current fiscal year. Hon. members will appreciate that this is based on an estimated rate of recruitment calculated some months ago, and if this rate is not met the actual expenditure will be proportionately less. The remaining objects of the vote total $130,000 and have been estimated on a per capita basis using the experience of the Department of

Defence Production. That is all I propose to say about the Department of Industry.
Turning now to the atomic energy estimates, votes 1 and 5, which, as I mentioned can be found on page 38 of the main estimates, I would point out that these votes concern the expenditures of the atomic energy control board, regulatory body set up by the Atomic Energy Control Act in 1946. The primary function of the board is to control dealings in atomic energy materials and equipment in the interests of national security and health and safety. It administers this control by means of a licensing system operated under the atomic energy control regulations.
Vote No. 1 is to provide for administration expenses of a staff of 15 employees and two advisory committees to assist the board in its operations. Most inspection of atomic energy activities is carried out on behalf of the board by other organizations, such as the Department of National Health and Welfare and provincial health departments, but the board's staff includes inspection officers with experience in the design and operation of nuclear reactors and in the problems of nuclear safety associated with the handling of enriched uranium.
Under the Atomic Energy Control Act the board is also authorized to make grants in aid of atomic energy research and training. Since the war the board has assisted Canadian universities to purchase and operate major items of atomic energy equipment to enable them to carry out fundamental atomic energy research and to train the engineers and scientists needed for future atomic operations in this country. Vote No. 5 is for the purpose of continuing this aid for university atomic energy research and training.
Votes Nos. 10 and 11 relate to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, a crown corporation. Its work may be divided roughly into three parts. These, of course, are closely related and progress in one usually yields side results that are important to the others. The first part of A.E.C.L.'s work, and one I will be referring to briefly later on, is fundamental research in all areas of nuclear science. The second, and by far the largest part of A.E.C.L.'s work, is to promote the use of uranium as a source of economic power. This means applied laboratory research and large scale industrial development. The third part of A.E.C.L.'s work is to promote the production and use of radioisotopes as tools in medicine, industry and many other fields of endeavour.
During the last parliament a special committee on research engaged in a study of A.E.C.L.'s work. I am sure members of that committee will remember that A.E.C.L. has 28902-5-323
Supply-Industry
centred its nuclear power program on reactors that use natural uranium for the fuel and heavy water for the moderator. This system is technically and economically attractive, particularly for public utilities in regions where water power has already been fully harnessed and where there is no low cost coal, oil or gas.
One of its many attractions is that the fuel system is much simpler than that of other nuclear power systems, since no elaborate plants are needed to prepare the fuel for the reactor and no chemical processing needs to be done after the fuel leaves the reactor, having served its purpose.
Canada's first nuclear power station has now been in operation for more than a year. It is located about 140 miles from here, near Rolphton, Ontario. The day to day operation of the station is under the control of the Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario, which feeds the electricity produced into its electricity network. In the last year the station has been operated for specific periods to demonstrate that it is reliable and can stay on line for extended periods of time. Between these demonstration runs, components have been checked and improvements made to the plant. It is interesting to note that the major causes of trouble in the demonstration runs came from the more conventional items of equipment, such as turbine valves and auxiliary diesel motors, rather than from the nuclear portion of the plant.
This N.P.D. station is small, and generates only 20,000 kilowatts of electricity. Another station with 10 times the output is under construction by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited at Douglas point on the eastern shore of Lake Huron. Ontario Hydro is again cooperating in the construction and will operate the station when it is complete. The construction is going very well and should be finished on schedule less than a year from now. One of the most gratifying features, and I am sure this will commend itself to all hon. members, is that the costs to date are slightly lower than had been estimated. A.E.C.L. expects Douglas point to begin operating at full power during 1965, and when its performance has been adequately proven Ontario hydro has indicated its intention to buy the station from Atomic Energy of Canada Limited.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: This is a heavy water plant?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: This is a heavy water using plant but not a heavy water production plant.
But even Douglas point is being dwarfed by designs that are now under preparation. Requirements are developing for stations to produce 500,000 kilowatts, or 500 megawatts, and probably for several such stations on a

Supp ly-I ndustry
single site. Agreement has been reached with Ontario hydro that a nuclear power station of approximately 500,000 kilowatts capacity should be designed, and A.E.C.L. is now designing the nuclear part of such a power station and Ontario hydro is designing the conventional part of the power generating system. Negotiations are currently under way between the federal government, the government of Ontario and Ontario hydro on arrangements that could be made for the construction of a number of these very large stations in the province of Ontario.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Are these heavy water using plants?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Heavy water using plants.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: These large plants, these 500,000 kilowatt plants-


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: They are designed to use heavy water as the moderator.
Looking further into the future, A.E.C.L., in co-operation with Canadian industry, is studying ways to improve further heavy water nuclear power systems. The heavy water moderator nuclear power system is the technique which A.E.C.L. has been extraordinarily and uniquely successful in developing, and it is with a view to securing a greater use of that technique that the conversations and negotiations are being conducted with Ontario hydro.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Before the minister leaves that point, what are the arrangements between Ontario hydro and his department regarding costs? Are costs shared for installation and operation?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: There is no general formula for cost sharing as between A.E.C.L. and Ontario hydro. There are different cost arrangements in relation to the initial reactor at Rolphton, Ontario, and the one that is now nearing completion at Douglas point. There will probably be different arrangements yet again in relation to the larger plants on which negotiations are just starting. There is, however, a clear definition of functional responsibilities, in that A.E.C.L. takes full responsibility for the proper design and successful operation of the nuclear energy portion of a generating station, whereas Ontario hydro concerns itself with the design and proper functioning of the so-called conventional elements using the energy to convert it into electricity.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Is the same type of financial co-operation available to other utilities across Canada?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: 
Lucien Lamoureux: Is that agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Lucien Lamoureux: I understand I should now rise, report progress and ask leave to sit later this day. Is that agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Progress reported.
28902-5-323i
The Late President Kennedy THE LATE PRESIDENT KENNEDY



EXPRESSIONS OF SYMPATHY ON DEATH BY VIOLENCE

Lester Bowles Pearson: I rise, Mr. Speaker, to express, if I may, the feelings of shock and grief felt by all of us at the news of the attack on the life of the President of the United States. I rise also to convey on your behalf and, perhaps I may be permitted to say on this occasion, on behalf of all the people of our country the sense of desolation and dismay which we felt on the receipt of this news, a feeling which we share with the citizens of the United States of America.
I would also like to express our sympathy and convey our prayers to the wives and families of the President and the governor of Texas. I am sure that when the news came over the air our first thought was for them. I was about to add that with this sympathy went our fervent hope and prayers for their recovery, but I have just received a message that President Kennedy died at 2 p.m.
A heartbreaking tragedy has occurred. The world can ill afford at this time in our history to lose a man of his courage, a courage which he displayed both in war and in peace. It can ill afford to lose a man of his wisdom, his determination to advance the cause of freedom in his own country and in the world.
This is a tragedy not only for the President's family and for his people; it is a tragedy for all of us. No people outside the United States will share more deeply in this tragedy than the people of Canada, the neighbour of the United States.
It is difficult for me to say anything more at this time. Our hearts are filled with sadness.


John George Diefenbaker: It is difficult to find words to express the feelings of all who love freedom in this terrible tragedy which has taken place. One thinks of the words of the secretary for war when Lincoln was assassinated: "Now he belongs to the ages". And as Lincoln died endeavouring to bind the wounds that followed the civil war and to assure to those who were negro the right to stand upright as men, whatever history may record of President Kennedy, his stand on behalf of the equality of all men without regard to colour was to me an earnest endeavour to bring about the culmination of the dreams, the idealism and the life work of Lincoln.
It has been the penalty of greatness in the United States that its presidents walk constantly in the valley of the shadow of death. It is worthy of mention that under

The Late President Kennedy the British tradition of government, leaders have been singularly free from the assassin's hand. One prime minister of the United Kingdom only-in 1812 I think it was- died at the hands of an assassin. We in our country have been free from this, except in the case of two of our statesmen, D'Arcy McGee and George Brown. A tribune of freedom has gone. Whatever the disagreements, to me he stood as the embodiment of freedom not only in his own country but throughout the world. Canadians, yes, free men everywhere, will bow their heads in sorrow.
All of us would like to convey, as the Prime Minister has so eloquently done, our sympathy not only to Mrs. Kennedy and the family but to the people of the United States. Free men everywhere mourn. Mankind can ill afford to lose this man at this time.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that all of us, like the people of Canada, are stunned at the news of the assassination of the young and far seeing President of the United States. President Kennedy was a good friend of the people of Canada, and I think the people of Canada had a high regard for him. I think they watched with deep sympathy his endeavours to bring about racial integration and a better understanding among the people of his own country with regard to the problem of minority groups.
This tragedy is all the more pronounced since it has taken place in a democracy; because in democracies there are constitutional and peaceful means to bring about changes of government. It is a reflection on a democracy when an assassination like this takes place.
I am sure all of us are grief stricken at this sad news. I know that the Prime Minister will convey to Mrs. Kennedy, to Vice President Lyndon Johnson and to the government of the United States our deepest sympathy in this tragic hour, and our hope that the government of the United States will go forward with its program to develop a better racial understanding in its own country and to promote the interests of peace throughout the world. The members of this group join with the government and all members of the house in expressing our sympathy on this tragic occasion.


Robert Norman Thompson: Mr. Speaker, I join with those who have already spoken. We are shocked and deeply grieved by the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy of the United States. I am sure it is the thought and wish of every Canadian, not just those in this chamber this afternoon, that we extend our sympathies to his wife and family and also to the American people at this tragic time. We in Canada have watched his administration with perhaps keener interest than any other people in the world, and certainly we are grieved by this unfortunate incident that has taken place just a little while ago.
President Kennedy was a man who brought youth and a new ambition to the administration of the United States. He tackled the duties of his high office that carries such tremendous responsibilities with devotion and determination. Not only the people of the United States and of Canada, not only the people of the western world, but the people of all the world are the losers in this event.
As has already been said, we can ill afford at this time to lose a man of the calibre of John F. Kennedy. I think it would be well that when the Prime Minister sends the sentiments and sympathies of this house to the family of President Kennedy and the American people that he should also send our sympathies to the family of Governor Con-nally and the people of Texas.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, our group wishes to add its own tribute to that of the house, which unanimously extended its most sincere and deepest sympathy to those who are most sorely tried by this tragedy which has fallen upon the free world today.
The fact must be stressed that we find extremely loathsome acts such as this one which do nothing to strengthen the cause of those who are responsible for them. A man may be assassinated, but you cannot kill the principles he stood for. Others will rise after him to keep on defending his ideas and to promote democracy among the free nations of the world.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, as a tribute to and out of respect for the President, our friend, as a token of sympathy to his wife, for whom this has been a dark year, and to his family; and as an indication of our desire to share in the grief of the American people, I move, seconded by the right hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefenbaker), that this house do now adjourn until Monday.
Motion agreed to and the house adjourned at 2.50 p.m.

November 25, 19B3