1963-07-26

EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


Mr. Speaker:: By leave, I would like to lay on the table a copy of a resolution concerning world wide disarmament agreed to by the House of Representatives of the parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia on May 23, 1963, which has been forwarded to me by the Speaker of that house under cover of a letter dated July 18, 1963.

On the orders of the day:


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to refer to the document which Your Honour tabled at the opening of today's sitting. In view of the interest I am sure there will be in the document you received from the commonwealth of Australia, I wonder whether the house would agree that it be printed as an appendix to today's Hansard.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to have the document tabled this morning printed as an appendix to Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: For text of document above referred to, see appendix.]



NEWFOUNDLAND SAVINGS BANK ACT


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (for the Minister of Finance) moved: the first reading of Bill No. S-4 (from the Senate), to repeal the Newfoundland Savings Bank Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



HARBOURS


Hon. G. J. Mcllraith (Minister of Transport) moved: the first reading of Bill No. S-5 (from the Senate), to approve an agreement between the government of Canada and the province of Ontario respecting public harbours.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs and ask him whether representations have been made to President de Gaulle by the government of Canada with a view to securing his adherence to the nuclear test ban agreement. I realize that only a matter of hours has gone by since the signing of this agreement by the three nations concerned, but prior to that time had he discussed this matter, and what are his views as to the hopeful possibility of the adherence of France to the agreement?
Hon. Paul Marlin (Secrelary of Siale for
External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I want the Leader of the Opposition to know that I did note carefully what he said yesterday regarding any overture or initiative which might be taken by Canada concerning a matter as important as this. When the French foreign minister was in Ottawa two months ago I had an opportunity to discuss over a wide area a number of matters with him. The Leader of the Opposition will appreciate that in such a discussion matters of this kind were carefully canvassed. I would not want to be more specific in my reply at this time. May I add that on June 8 last, when speaking in Quebec I made this observation: Canada, as a North American country with its precious heritage of two cultures from its two mother countries, can play a useful role by exercising a discreet influence in order to bring about a still better Atlantic understanding. But, the task will not be easy. I am sure the Leader of the Opposition will understand that I cannot say any more at this time.


Hon. Paul Marfineau (Ponliac-Temiscamingue):: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question following the answer given by the Secretary of State for External Affairs. I should like him to tell the house whether preliminary negotiations are now under way for a meeting between the Prime Minister and President de Gaulle this fall.


Mr. Marlin (Essex East):: Mr. Speaker, there have been some discussions about a visit by the Prime Minister some time in the course
2664	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry of the next four or five months. Some arrangements have also been tentatively made for a visit by the Secretary of State for External Affairs some time in the month of December.


INQUIRY AS TO CANADA'S CONTRIBUTION TO WORLD FOOD PROGRAM
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. Nasserden (Roslhern):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce arising out of his statement on Wednesday, July 24, when he said:
It is expected that the total allocation for this purpose-
He was referring to gifts of food, and to wheat in particular.
-might rise to a level of around $40 million per annum over the course of the next few years.
I wonder if the minister could indicate the target he has in mind for the year commencing August 1.


Mitchell William Sharp: No, Mr. Speaker. It would be much too early to make such an estimate. We shall be consulting with a number of other exporting countries and with the wheat board to make sure that we do not spoil any commercial markets by our aid. I would hope that after we have had these consultations we shall be in a position to have a more definite program than we have at the moment. However, as I said in my statement, and as has been emphasized by some hon. gentlemen opposite, it is most important when we undertake this program that it should result in a genuine increase in the disposal of Canadian wheat and flour.


Mr. S. J. Korchinski (Mackenzie):: Has the
department prepared a list of countries to which these gifts would go?


Mitchell William Sharp: We shall, of course, be examining a list of many countries. I do not think it would be in the public interest or in the interest of the wheat board to make public such a list.


IMMIGRATION
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Joseph Macaluso (Hamilton West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration or, in his absence, to the acting minister. Does the minister intend to exempt from visa requirements the citizens of Spain, Italy and Greece coming to Canada as tourists for periods of less than three months, as has already been done in the case of citizens of a group of other European countries?


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, I believe the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has been giving consideration to this problem, and I think he has the intention of making a statement on the mater, perhaps on Monday. I will bring the matter to his attention.


LABOUR RELATIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Leon Balcer (Three Rivers):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Labour. Has he received assurances from the C.M.U., the national association of marine engineers and the Canadian merchant service guild that they would accept a temporary government trusteeship over their unions in accordance with the Norris report recommendations?


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, this is one question I should like to take as notice because I should like to review the file on this particular matter to be absolutely sure.


Léon Balcer: A supplementary question. I wonder whether the minister could tell us whether he has sought such assurances and has asked the unions for them?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: No, Mr. Speaker, I have not sought the assurance of any of these particular unions.
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the
Opposition): Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Has the minister not been in consultation with the heads of various unions, and in particular with the C.L.C., in this regard, and has he received from the president of the C.L.C. acceptance of the principle of the appointment of trustees?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, I did have
a meeting two days ago with the executive officers of the C.L.C. and we did discuss a number of matters, particularly the recommendations of the Norris report. I understood on my own part that these discussions were confidential, and that it would not be appropriate to report the attitude taken at that meeting by the officers of the congress.


John George Diefenbaker: Was it as a result of these
conversations that there has been what I think is a delay in bringing before the house legislation in this regard? Is the delay and the examination now being made by the various officials a result of the representations which were made by the C.L.C.?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, if delay is defined as a lapse of time, then there has been delay in the discussion or consideration of the recommendations of the Norris report. I think hon. gentlemen generally would agree that because of the far reaching nature of the recommendations and the complexity of the whole problem, considerable care has to be taken in reaching what would be an effective decision in this matter.
Having said that, I should like to tell the Leader of the Opposition that there is no relationship between the length of time spent in considering this problem and the conference with the executive officers.
(Translation):


SUGGESTION TO SELL BUTTER TO UNITED KINGDOM
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Clement Vincent (Nicolel-Yamaska):: Mr. Speaker, it was my intention to put a question to the Minister of Agriculture, but since he is absent I shall direct it to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. In view of the shortage of butter in Europe at present, and especially in the United Kingdom, can the minister tell us whether he thinks that Canada will be able to sell butter to that country, as the previous government did in 1959, when sales of that product to England totalled $4 million?
(Text):


Mitchell William Sharp: I do not think we shall lose any opportunity of selling butter anywhere in the world but, as the hon. gentleman knows, the price of butter in Canada is higher than the world price generally. This does present a problem, because in order to meet competition in other parts of the world our butter has to be sold below its cost.
(Translation):


Clément Vincent: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. According to the information I was given, if the price of butter increased a little in England, because of that shortage

(Text):


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The original question was really one for the order paper. If the supplementary is pressing, would the hon. member please present it; if not, would he kindly put it on the order paper? (Translation):


EXPORTS OF DAIRY PRODUCTS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolieife-L'Assomplion-Montcalm):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my last question for today to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. What steps does the
Inquiries of the Ministry minister intend to take to export our surplus dairy products?
(Text):


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member was very kind in giving me notice of this question. In addition to the normal functions of the department in promoting trade, its main function being to keep industry aware of and to seek export opportunities, efforts are continuing on behalf of the dairy industry to secure more favourable terms of access for dairy products, particularly into the United States. Through the trade fair program Canadian dairy products, especially cheddar cheese, are being promoted in Japan, Australia and West Germany. A foothold has been obtained in the Nigerian market for sales of consumer sized packages of both skimmed milk powder and cheddar cheese. Prospects for the sale of dairy products through the establishment of milk recombining plants in newly developed countries, particularly in Africa, are being carefully studied and the industry is being kept informed of these developments.
The government also assists the industry to sell dairy products abroad through an export sales program on concentrated milk products. Quantities of dairy products are being made available also for use under the world food program. As I said earlier in reply to a question from another hon. member, the sale of Canadian butter abroad has been difficult since our domestic price level exceeds the world market price.


UNITED NATIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolieile-L'Assompiion-
Monicalm): I should like to address a question to the Minister of External Affairs. Is it the intention of the government to recommend the admission of communist China to membership in the United Nations?
(Translation):
Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I feel I
should let the hon. member know that, to my mind, his question probably stems from what I had the occasion to say yesterday before the committee on national defence.
I pointed out that my comments should not be interpreted as a proof that a new policy has been adopted concerning our relations with communist China, but that it was imperative to acknowledge the dangers inherent in communist China's attitude towards nuclear warfare.
2666	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry
If I am not mistaken, that is precisely what the right hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefenbaker) had in mind yesterday, when he made, in the House of Commons, the following statement to be found on page 2602 of Hansard:
I think a major challenge is presented to the nations of the western world today. Canada, the United States and other nations will have to take another look at our policy regarding communist China. We will have to review our thinking. We will have to consider the problem, and it is a tremendous one, in the perspective of changing events, and particularly in view of this agreement; because unless it includes communist China- and I do not want to mention France in the same paragraph-and we are able to secure the adherence of communist China, the threat of nuclear war will hang over us to a degree that we can only anticipate with foreboding, horror and overwhelming fear.
Mr. Speaker, I wish the house to know that I support unconditionally the words of the right hon. Leader of the Opposition. (Text):


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate very much the lengthy quotation which made it possible for an intelligent answer to be given, but I am interested in knowing what the answer is to the question that was asked. (Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a supplementary question. Does the Canadian government intend to establish diplomatic relations with communist China?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I already said yesterday that the government has no such intention. In addition, the question has not been discussed by the cabinet- (Text):
For the benefit of the Prime Minister, what I said in French-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: He understands French very well.


Paul Joseph James Martin: -for the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, what I said was that there had been no discussion involving a change of policy in this matter. The quotation I used and which I applauded was, I believe, a wise statement made by the right hon. gentleman yesterday, and it was the kind of statement that I, less succinctly and less lucidly, I admit, made in the defence committee.


AIRPORTS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Robert Simpson (Churchill):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question 

to the Minister of Transport. In view of the fact that certain types of aircraft, particularly the Viscount, which normally fly a regular scheduled air service into the Department of Transport airport at The Pas, Manitoba, have recently been curtailed due to the deterioration of the runways, can the minister tell me what plans the department may have for rectifying this situation?


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the hon. gentleman would be content to have me deal with that matter on the estimates, which will be the first item of business called today. I could give him better information then than by attempting to answer the question now.


Robert Simpson: If they are coming up today that will be fine.


FINANCE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. A. Olson (Medicine Hat):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I directed a question to the Solicitor General respecting an allegation that the statutory limit of 6 per cent on loans by the chartered banks had been violated. His answer was that it would not be appropriate for a minister of the government to comment on such revelations. I wonder whether he would, on reflection, consider initiating some kind of investigation to ascertain whether the allegation is true, inasmuch as it involves the alleged violation of a federal statute.


Hon. J. Watson MacNaughl (Solicitor General):: Mr. Speaker, I shall refer the matter to my colleague the Minister of Justice, under whose jurisdiction it would more properly come.
(Translation):


INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Maurice Cote (Chicoutimi):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Prime Minister may I ask a question of the Acting Prime Minister.
Could he tell the house whether a Frenchspeaking assistant will be appointed to the new Minister of Industry in order to "promote" the interests of French Canada since it was not deemed appropriate to appoint a French speaking deputy minister?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I believe that the Prime Minister intends to answer this question probably next week.

(Text):


PARLIAMENT HILL
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a question to that natural negotiator, the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Last Thursday I asked the Minister of Public Works whether during the changing of the guard here on the hill the tourists, for that half hour, might be allowed to use the parking space reserved for the diplomatic corps, which was seldom occupied. The minister replied that the question was being considered. I should like to ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs if he would ask his friends in the diplomatic corps to volunteer this space, which they never use at this hour anyway, for the accommodation of tourists.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think my friend will appreciate that his question has implications which even I cannot understand. I think the question had better rest there until Monday.


HEALTH AND WELFARE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. P. B. Rynard (Simcoe East):: In the
absence of the Minister of National Health and Welfare I will address this question to the parliamentary secretary. I am wondering if the department has given any recent attention to a report from the United States that certain chemicals being used in insecticides are suspected of causing cancer in humans. I regret that I did not have the opportunity to give the parliamentary secretary notice of this question, and he might want to take this as notice.


Mr. Stanley Haidasz (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I should like to take this question as notice.


ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Robert C. Coates (Cumberland):: I
should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State. Would he care to make a report to the house on the meeting with the premiers of the four Atlantic provinces relative to the Atlantic development board? He might also be able to inform the house when we can ex-28902-5-170
Inquiries of the Ministry pect the appointment of the six additional members to the board.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, there was a meeting yesterday for little over an hour with the Atlantic premiers and my colleagues from the Atlantic provinces, the Minister of Industry and the chairman and director of the Atlantic development board. I think it was generally agreed that there was a very useful exchange of views. Certain explanations were given about the plans the government hoped to see carried out by the department of industry, the area development agency and the Atlantic development board. I invited the premiers, as I said I would do here in the house, to appoint liaison officers to deal with the board to ensure continuous consultations and co-operation. The invitation was accepted by the four premiers.
In so far as the appointment of additional members to the board is concerned, I hope that as soon as the legislation, which has now been approved by both houses, has received royal assent it will be possible to make those appointments without any delay at all so that a meeting of the board may be held at the earliest possible moment.



HISTORIC SITES AND MONUMENTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr.  R. Gordon L. Fairweather@Royal: have a question for the Minister of Fisheries in his capacity as the minister representing New Brunswick. Will he take immediate steps, in the spirit of Hyannis Port, to clear away international red tape, which sounds more ominous than the national variety, and thus permit the public to visit the late President Franklin Roosevelt's summer home?


Hon. H. J. Robichaud (Minister of Fisheries):: Mr. Speaker, this is a matter that does not come under the jurisdiction of the Department of Fisheries. I really doubt if there is such international red tape, but I shall bring the matter to the attention of the proper authorities.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE INQUIRY AS TO INVITATIONS TO YUKON AND NORTHWEST TERRITORIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gene Rheaume (Northwest Territories):: I should like to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister. On July 18 the Prime Minister promised me he would look into the possibility of having representatives of the Northwest Territories and Yukon governments participate in this conference today.

Inquiries of the Ministry I wonder if the Acting Prime Minister could let me know whether that promise has been translated into any kind of action.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I will bring this matter to the attention of the Prime Minister immediately, and I am sure he will deal with it on Monday.



STANDARD OF DRESS IN CHAMBER AND GALLERIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: should like to address a question to a responsible minister and ask that consideration be given by Mr. Speaker to a problem that I think concerns all of us. In view of certain temperatures and humidities in the capital city, will consideration be given to what is known as conventional dress in the House of Commons, in view of the continual breakdown of the air conditioning system? At the same time, will the minister responsible for making representations to Mr. Speaker also give consideration to the situation, in the light of the temperature and humidity, when members like myself have guests from constituencies 3,000 miles away who are denied admission to the house on your invitation and signature, sir, because a teen age boys does not have a jacket and because the father is not wearing conventional trousers but is wearing shorts? I think, sir, we would all be interested in having Mr. Speaker take these questions under immediate advisement.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am sure Mr. Speaker has heard the point.


Mr. Speaker:: I have heard the point.



AIR CONDITIONING FOR TRANSLATORS' BOOTHS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: I should like to address a question to the Minister of Public Works, and I trust Your Honour might take note of it. In view of the fact that the present extreme heat wave is likely to last until the end of this part of the session, would the minister take into consideration over the week end installing, perhaps on a rental basis, air cooling devices in the booths where our translators have to do their work? I understand the present interior condition of these booths is like that of the black hole of Calcutta.


Hon. J. P. Deschatelets (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, in answering this question I might also answer part of the question asked by the hon. member for Vancouver East. I shall immediately bring this matter to the attention of the chief architect of the Department of Public Works.
[Mr. Rheaume.l
I might also say that we have already prepared a plan for general improvement of the building, so far as air conditioning is concerned, for the benefit of hon. members in their offices and also in the elevators. There are other improvements which we think ought to be carried out in the building. It is an old building which needs modernization, but we do not want to do it piecemeal.
I hope that when the house meets again in the fall we will be in a position to disclose the plans we have and, Mr. Speaker, we intend to proceed immediately with this work for the benefit of all hon. members.


Harold Edward Winch: As a supplementary question, in view of the statement made by the Minister of Public Works, and relating to the question I asked a few moments ago, when His Honour the Speaker is considering the members of the House of Commons and those in the gallery, will he also give consideration in dress to the members of the press gallery, who have to steam under even greater hardship than we do?



INQUIRY AS TO IMPROVEMENT OF PARKING FACILITIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. My question is supplementary to the announcement he made to the effect that the government is preparing long range plans for improvements in the parliament buildings. In view of the parking problem on parliament hill, is the government giving consideration to the provision of underground parking as a means of increasing the amount of parking space available on the hill and at the same time preserving the beauty of the grounds that we have at this historic site?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Speaker, this is an important
matter, no doubt because the parking facilities on the hill have developed into a very serious problem. For the past three weeks we have been considering three different plans, and one of them refers to underground parking. We think we will be in a position, perhaps within a month, to arrive at a decision as to which plan would be the best and would suit the present conditions. No doubt when hon. members return in the fall we will have a definite plan. I hope we will get it under way as soon as possible, because as I have said before, this is a very serious problem and something should be done this year.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Raymond Martineau: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of National Defence. Following his talks with General Lemnitzer, the supreme allied commander for NATO, is he in a position to tell the house what will be the future role of the air squadron stationed in France?


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of National Defence):: No, Mr. Speaker, there is no immediate plan for a change. As I have already told the house, the entire purview of national defence policy for the future is under review.


Paul Raymond Martineau: May I ask a supplementary question. Can the minister give some report on his talks with the general?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: We had very interesting talks ranging over a wide variety of subjects of mutual interest. We discussed all the current problems involved in the defence of the central European area and how Canada could best contribute to it. I think the talks were very helpful to us in planning for the future.


Paul Raymond Martineau: May I ask another supplementary question. In the course of the wide ranging talks, can he say if the question of equipping these Starfighters with nuclear arms came up?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: Well, I would not care to recapitulate all the subjects that were discussed. We had a very good exchange of views on all these important matters.



SHIPPING

[Stage Direction]
INQUIRY AS TO OWNERSHIP OF S.S. "tRITONICA"
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport. My question has reference to the Tritonica, one of the ships to the sinking of which the minister referred in this house on Tuesday. In view of the fact that he gave us certain information, namely that the ship was registered in Bermuda, that it was manned mainly by a Chinese crew and that it was plying between two Canadian ports, can he also tell us who owned the ship?


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry I cannot give that information at the moment. I had it the other day but I have forgotten it. I will provide it later today.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister find out if it was Canada Steamship Lines?
28902-5-1701
Inquiries of the Ministry


George James McIlraith: I will get the information later today and supply it to the hon. member.



REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF DELIVERY PRIVILEGES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. E. Pascoe (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker I have a question for the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Is the minister now in a position to answer the question I asked him last week regarding the possibility of wheat delivery privileges being extended past July 31, the end of this crop year, for those who have been unable to deliver their full crop quotas?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I have been in communication with the wheat board fairly continuously over the last few days over this problem of deliveries, and I hope to be able to make a statement setting out the position early next week.
(Translation):



NORTHERN AFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, I would like to address my question to his parliamentary secretary. Since the officials have completed their reports in connection with the possible transfer of Eskimo affairs to the government of the province of Quebec, when will there be a meeting of representatives of the federal and provincial governments to effect the transfer?


Mr. J. N. Turner (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, when the date is set, it will be announced in the house in the usual way.



PENSIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Speaker, before we proceed with the orders of the day, I have a question I should have liked to ask the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In her absence, I shall direct it to her parliamentary secretary. Has the minister received any communication from the firm of Alexander & Alexander Services
2670	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry Limited concerning the Canada pension plan and, if so, does she intend to inform the house about it?


Stanley Haidasz: Mr. Speaker, I shall take the hon. member's question as notice and pass it on to the minister.
(Text):



TRADE AND COMMERCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot asked me whether a publication entitled Circle Tour from Trans-Canada Highway would be published in French. As hon. members know, the Canadian government travel bureau is concerned with attracting tourists to Canada; therefore this publication, which was directed particularly to the United States, was published only in English.
Recently the bureau has been extending its activities into Europe. It has an office now functioning in London, and shortly we intend to extend the travel bureau's activities to France and Germany. This will, of course, make necessary the publication in French and German, and perhaps in other languages, of the publications which hitherto have been directed particularly to the United States.



PUBLIC WORKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hubert Badanai (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, on Monday last the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg asked whether repairs to the canal bridge at Chester were under consideration. The answer is that permanent repairs to the existing bridge are not considered feasible. Construction of a new bridge is now under investigation.



ARTS, LETTERS AND SCIENCES REPORTED STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS OF COMMISSION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister, and I may say he is P.M. to all of us at all times, and has been all his life. I want to reciprocate his kind references to me in that regard, and ask him whether any consideration has been given to an examina-


tion of the rather unusual statements, prejudging the bicultural commission, made by Mr. Andre Laurendeau, Mr. Jean Louis Gagnon, Mr. Jean Marchand, Mrs. Laing and Mr. Royce Frith. These observations indicate a prejudgment of the task these people have, and I am wondering whether an examination has been made of them?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, may I say first of all to my right hon. friend that if I have always been his P.M. I cannot say that he has always been my P.M. I may say to him quite sincerely that, notwithstanding our political differences, I have always regarded him in the friendliest way, and I know he has so regarded me.
I should like to take advantage of the question which the Leader of the Opposition has put, in order to read the comments which he says have been made and which I have not seen. I shall bring them to the attention of my colleagues in the government.



TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. R. Souiham (Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport. In view of the large number of applications for railway line abandonment pending before the board of transport commissioners, awaiting government consideration of the MacPherson royal commission report, could the minister bring the house up to date on what action the government contemplates taking with respect to this very important matter?


George James McIlraith: Yes, Mr. Speaker. It is not a matter of a large number of rail line abandonment applications awaiting hearing before the board. It is rather a case of large numbers of notices of intention to apply having been filed with the board. This was done at the request of the government so there would be available, when policies were being worked out, some idea of what was involved, and in this way there would be an appreciation of the possible problems facing the policy makers. It is quite improper to refer to these as applications for abandonment, because great numbers of them may never become applications for abandonment and may never be proceeded with. But getting the notices of intention forward so we would have some idea of what could be involved in the problem is very important.
Coming to the other part of the question, Mr. Speaker, it is, as I think I indicated earlier, the intention of the government to proceed with legislation on many parts of the

MacPherson royal commission report, including of course this whole matter relating to rail line abandonment, later this session.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign the Prime Minister undertook to set up a committee for the purpose of looking into the whole question of railway line abandonment. Has that committee been set up?


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, in answer to the Leader of the Opposition, I think the reference he has in mind was made in the Prime Minister's speech at Selkirk. Action was taken on that matter very soon after the government was set up; I am not sure whether it was at the second or third meeting of the cabinet.


John George Diefenbaker: Is it a ministerial committee?


George James McIlraith: It was done by creating a transport committee of cabinet, and that committee has been quite actively engaged. I can assure the Leader of the Opposition that this subject has been receiving very close and very active consideration since the very first days this government took office. When I say that, I am not only referring to the policy matters, but in regard to proceeding with the preparation of the appropriate legislation, consultations with the premiers of those provinces most directly concerned and consultations with the various provincial government officials concerned with this problem at the working level.



CANADA ELECTIONS ACT


John Whitney Pickersgill: That the standing committee on privileges and elections be empowered to study the Canada Elections Act, and the several amendments thereto suggested by the chief electoral officer; and to report to the house such proposals relating to the said act as the committee may deem to be advisable.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Lamoureux in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
Contingencies and miscellaneous-
50b. Miscellaneous minor or unforeseen expenses -to extend the purposes of vote 50 of the main estimates to supplement, in such amounts and in accordance with such terms and conditions as the treasury board may prescribe, the estimates of other departments in order to provide for an accelerated construction and repair program and to provide a further amount of, $7,000,000.
Supply-Finance
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether I may just say a word about this item, which will then be explained by my colleague the Minister of Labour. It will be noted, sir, that this is an item to supplement the miscellaneous minor or unforeseen vote of the Department of Finance which appears in the main estimates. While it is quite unusual for a supplementary to be voted before the main item is voted, this is partly the result of the calendar and the fact that we had an election and the estimates are not coming along at the ordinary time.
The purpose of this vote is to provide funds to carry out one of the programs announced by my hon. friend the Minister of Labour on June 10 last. It was thought that in order to be quite sure there would not be any financial problem about going ahead with any of this work, it should be brought before the house at this stage. That is the reason for doing it. The reason for putting it in this particular vote is that it is contemplated that the actual expenditures will be made, as is the case with this vote ordinarily, in various other departments and transferred from this finance vote to the other departments in the normal way of which hon. members who have sat on treasury board are well aware.
We were advised by the officials of the treasury board that under our procedures this was the most satisfactory way of dealing with this problem. I had some doubt, I must confess on reflection, after making the announcement last night that I would ask for the vote, about whether I had been properly in order since the Department of Finance have not been called after the supply motion. I spoke to the hon. gentlemen opposite and also consulted the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, who I readily admit knows a lot more about the rules than I do-


Stanley Howard Knowles: Only when he agrees with the minister.


John Whitney Pickersgill: He is not always right either-and he persuaded me that it is probably in order, almost certainly in order in a technical sense, to proceed with this vote. I am prepared to say that if any hon. member, because of the unusual character of the procedure, felt that it was not a proper thing to do at this time the government would not proceed with it.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, it is so unusual to hear the hon. gentleman speak with uncertainty of his opinion that I am sure the house would, under the circumstances, be willing to do anything to approve a request on his part. He usually lectures the house as to what it should or should not do, and speaks with an extra authority. Today he spoke with that diffidence and concern with

Supply^Finance
which all good house leaders speak when they have to bring about something that is not altogether proper. That he should have made an error in his interpretation of the rules has always been excusable, because after all Homer himself once nodded. Having said that, I think we on this side of the house, in view of the explanation, would be entirely prepared to go on with this procedure.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I want to thank the right hon. gentleman without any reservation for his kind, and I think salutary, observations.


Mr. Churchill:: Mr. Chairman, might I have the privilege of saying a word or two along this line. I think of occasions in the past when as house leader I suggested even minor alterations in the business which was before the house, and I was from time to time subjected to considerable invective and sharp attacks from the present Secretary of State and his colleague who is now Minister of Justice. I also carried the burden, in certain reports which appeared publicly, of delaying the business of the house and indulging in wrangling. I hope the present house leader will now realize some of the difficulties which confront the government house leader and that next year, when he will be house leader of the Liberal opposition, he will realize that co-operation with the government house leader is sometimes the best way of expediting the business of parliament.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I will endeavour at all times, as long as I am on this side of the house, to show the same humility the hon. gentleman showed when he was here.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Mr. Chairman, if there is any problem as to the propriety of taking this action today we in this group would give unanimous consent, although we do not think there is any difficulty in that respect. I should like to comment for a moment on the remark made by the Secretary of State to the effect that the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre knew a whole lot more about the rules than he did. He also added that he is sometimes wrong. The only deduction I can make is that when the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre is wrong he knows it.


John Whitney Pickersgill: So do I.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I guess I had better stay out of this, although I would say to the present house leader and the former house leader, who have been having a very friendly exchange, that if at any time they are in difficulty and need someone to mediate between them I will be quite glad to [DOT]offer my services. We too are quite prepared, 4f- it is necessary, to give unanimous consent

to this procedure, but I am positive that this is not necessary. Rule 56 (6), which need not even be read, says quite clearly that a supplementary estimate is in the same category as interim supply, and I suggest that it is quite in order to go ahead.


Mr. MacLean (Queens):: Mr. Chairman, I should just like to ask the Secretary of State something for clarification purposes. Order No. 18 on the order paper refers to:
-main estimates and supplementary estimates (A) and (B) referred.
If I heard the chairman correctly he called only supplementary estimates (B) and we have them before us. 1 should like the Secretary of State to identify for us supplementary estimates (A) and tell us whether they are under consideration, or what they refer to.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Supplementary estimates (A) were the supplementary estimates which were tabled before we last asked for interim supply, and they covered all or most of the departments of government. The estimates for my hon. friend the Minister of Trade and Commerce have already been voted from (A). I take it that when, which I hope will not be long from now, we reach the estimates of my hon. friend the Minister of Transport, supplementary estimates (A) as well as the main estimates will both be before the committee when the items are called. We just wanted to dispose of this one first, and it was called separately. I think that is the correct explanation, and the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre seems to be indicating concurrence. I hope now, sir, that my hon. friend the Minister of Labour can tell us what the vote is about.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, my remarks on this item will be very brief. The house will recall that in June the government indicated that it intended to bring forward additional projects that had not been provided for in the main estimates. The purpose of this program was to help to alleviate particularly the problem of high seasonal winter unemployment.
The main estimates provided among other matters for both building and construction programs. I have been authorized by the government to ask various departments to bring forward additional projects for which moneys are not provided in the main estimates. The purpose of this item is to provide the moneys that will allow these projects to go forward. I should simply like to add that I have asked the various departments of government to bring forward projects which are justified on other grounds and which are in a state of readiness but which have not been provided for in the main estimates.

The item provides that these programs are subject to approval by treasury board, but I should like to add that they will also come forward to the Department of Labour for examination. The Department of Labour will attempt to assess the acceptance of these programs on two counts; first, that there should be sufficient labour content or employment content in these programs to justify their acceptance as an employment measure; and second, that these projects be undertaken in areas of high unemployment. It will not be the intention to bring forward additional projects under this item in areas in the country where there is not a specially high rate of unemployment. In other words this is an effort to deal with unemployment by providing additional programs with a justifiable labour content and to apply them in areas of high unemployment.


Mr. Slarr:: I should like to add just a few words to this discussion in view of what the Minister of Labour has said in trying to explain to the committee what this $7 million is intended to provide. All I have been able to gather is that this sum is being provided for the purpose of alleviating high seasonal unemployment and that certain departments are to undertake projects in order to help in this worth-while cause.
However, I feel we are being asked to approve an item which is somewhat hypothetical, at least with respect to the actual construction which is to be carried out by the various departments. Ordinarily public works required by each department are provided for in the main estimates, although occasionally supplementary estimates are introduced. It is usual for these projects to be carried out, at the request of the Department of Labour, at the time when seasonal unemployment is at its peak in order to help tide over that period. However, it seems that this is an additional amount, and the question which arises in my mind is this. Have the departments already planned certain projects, and what are those projects? What departments will be taking part in the expenditure of this $7 million?
It also seems odd to me that approval is apparently being sought for the expenditure of this $7 million without prior approval having been given by treasury board. The course usually followed, I believe, is that the department puts forward an estimate of expenditures. The estimate is approved by the treasury board, and only then is it brought before parliament for final approval. Here the minister is saying that parliament should approve first of all and that the item would then go- before treasury board for approval. I wonder if the minister could tell us what specific projects will be undertaken, which departments are likely to be participating, and
Supply-Finance
what plans they have with respect to the expenditure of this $7 million. I should also like the minister to give us some idea of the number of man hours of work the expenditure of this money is likely to provide.


Mr. Lambert:: Like my hon. friend the member for Ontario I am somewhat puzzled by the procedure which is being followed. We are being asked to vote $7 million under an item which was really not designed for the purpose to which the minister has referred. We know the purpose of the schedule of items in the estimates, and this is not the one normally used to help deal with employment problems. In effect we are being asked to write a blank cheque to the extent of $7 million, and obviously we should like to know which departments are likely to take advantage of this provision. After all, an estimate of $7 million has been made, so unless someone has picked the figure out of a hat and said "We shall hold them down to this" it should be possible to give the committee some idea of how the money is intended to be spent as among the various branches of government. In the light of the new love for planning which seems to have developed in certain quarters I would hardly think this is the way in which the government would have proceeded. Is most of this money likely to be spent by the Department of Transport, or by the Department of Public Works, or by-


An hon. Member:: Northern affairs.


Norman Platt Lambert: Well, the department of northern affairs in the wintertime? That may be, but normally it would not be. I think the minister should give us some further information, because it seems to me we are being asked to write what is in effect a blank cheque for a grab bag fund.


Mr. Fairweather:: I am interested in the formula which the department proposes to use in defining an area of high unemployment. What is the size of such an area likely to be? Would it be a constituency, or would it be larger? Finally, would the national employment service give the hon. gentleman advice on this matter or would it be some other branch or department?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I listened with interest to the minister's brief statement, and I want to take this opportunity to ask him a question or two because there seems to be some interesting happenings under the winter works program. When the hon. gentleman comes to reply, will he inform the committee as to the types of community organization other than incorporated municipalities which -are entitled - to qualify for grants under this program? I am thinking of privately owned

Supply-Finance
organizations. My second question is this. Is there any co-ordination between the Department of Labour and other departments of government when consideration is being given to the making of these grants?
I want to bring these circumstances to the attention of the minister. A certain fruit growing area in my constituency which has a considerable irrigation system was informed by the water controller of the province of British Columbia that it would be unwise for the growers to undertake any extensive or unusual repairs to the system because it was likely they would be flooded out in a year or two. Consequently no repairs were made. Then a hint was given that it might be possible to rebuild this irrigation system under the winter works program. An application was made accordingly, and I do not blame these people one bit for doing so. They proceeded to rebuild the irrigation system as a result of the assistance they received from the federal and provincial governments even though they had been previously informed by another department that it would not be required in another two or three years.
So we have the Secretary of State for External Affairs doing his best to see that these people are flooded under 25 feet of water, and at the same time we have the Department of Labour making grants to them against the advice of water board officials to assist them to rebuild a system which, it has been said, may not be needed. I would ask the minister to explain what degree of liaison there is among the various departments of government, who now appear to be working at cross purposes, and to tell us what types of organizations other than municipalities are entitled to receive grants under the winter works program.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, I am
going to begin by saying that the Minister of Labour is one minister who always tries to answer questions directed to him, and I have found that to be his regular course. It is in that spirit that I now ask him to inform the house how this $7 million is to be expended. What is the general plan? There must be something in mind. Surely it is not to be a case of expenditure without a policy. How is the amount going to be divided? Is it to be a melon that is to be cut in various segments depending upon the demand in the particular departments?
I am sure we could reduce the amount of debate very greatly if the minister would tell us what the circumstances are that have impelled this unusual course. What is the extra amount going to be used for? What department is it expected will be making the expenditure? I put this in capsule form
[Mr. Herridge.l
and ask him if he will not give hon. members this information now rather than wait, for after all the house has a right to know why such an unusual procedure of asking for $7 million over and above the regular amount of $3 million provided in the estimates is being followed. Would he be willing to advise the house now?
As the hon. member for Edmonton West has said, is this a blank cheque? My memory takes me back a few years to 1930. I recall the tremendous fulminations in the session in the fall of that year by the Right Hon. Mackenzie King when he spoke with authority and knowledge of the practice from the days of Runnymede to 1930, the need of parliament to have the fullest information, and said that nothing was more detrimental to responsible government than blank cheque advances made by parliament. I would ask the minister to give the house the fullest information he has. I am sure he must have it. The government is not asking for $7 million for the fun of it. It must know what it is going to do with it. The Minister of Finance has shown a propensity this session for asking for things about which there was no clarity in advance. I am sure the Minister of Labour does not want to join in the same company.


Mr. Smith:: Mr. Chairman, when the
minister was speaking he expressed his desire that this money be spent on works with a very high labour content. I should like to remind the minister and his colleagues that the shipbuilding industry has the highest degree of labour content, and that if he refers to the Department of Transport and the Canadian maritime commission he will find a large shelf of plans for ships that could be quickly built. I know that $7 million will not build many ships, but having regard to the conditions in the country I am sure we will be faced with further supplementary estimates. Furthermore, now that the minister has been in charge of the department for some time and perhaps knows something about employment conditions in the country, I think it might be wise if he were to again look at the length of time that the winter works program will be applicable. If he could give the municipalities some assurance that the program would be extended they could then do a lot of planning for winter works now.


Mr. Barnett:: Mr. Chairman, I am quite agreeable to joining in the various suggestions that have been made that we get from the minister as much information as possible as to the purposes of the vote. I also support the suggestion made by the hon. member for

Kootenay West that there should be careful scrutiny and examination of the manner in which this money is spent.
However, in view of what I regard as the very modest sum being proposed in relation to the purposes outlined in an earlier statement to the house by the Minister of Labour, I was a little puzzled by the suggestion of the hon. member for Edmonton West that the whole question of planning was involved in the expenditure of this sum. If we were being asked to appropriate $700 million, then I should think that would be a very legitimate approach to take to the question. Somebody used the word "peanuts" the other day in the house, and in relation to the scope of the problem that needs to be dealt with it is my view that this item is really very modest.
If the minister were to request me to offer suggestions, I am quite sure I could put forward proposals with regard to my own constituency that would eat up most, if not all, of the $7 million. I am sure the minister is aware of the fact that we have a somewhat milder climate on Vancouver island than do some other parts of Canada, and that this would be a very pleasant place for some of those who in the past have normally been unemployed in the winter to find useful occupations. I think most hon. members are familiar with the fact that the level of unemployment in British Columbia in the wintertime tends to rise for the very reason that many Canadians are inclined to migrate or drift to that part of the country during the winter season.
As far as I am concerned, my reaction to this vote is that it is altogether too modest for the purposes which, according to the statements made by the Minister of Labour and the Secretary of State, the government has in mind. The Minister of Labour said something about accepting suggestions from the various departments of the government. I am not sure that he will be willing to accept suggestions from all members of the house in connection with the spending of this money, but I do know that in my own constituency, for example, there are a number of very useful public works projects, some of them with a substantial labour content, that have been postponed for one reason or another. Some of them went by the board because of what was referred to in the last parliament as the austerity program but which to me represented unnecessary delay in the provision of needed community projects and public services. I should like to suggest that the Minister of Labour should have raised his sights a little higher when he was
Supply-Finance
suggesting to his colleagues that this item should be brought forward in this way at this time.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, I will try to answer as well as I can the questions that have been raised by my hon. friends in connection with this item. I am sure that all of us are concerned about the prospect of seasonally high winter unemployment that has been characteristic of the Canadian economy. With that in mind I hope I can make the purpose of this item clear to hon. gentlemen.
There is now provision in the main estimates as we now have them for various projects. The officials of the Department of Labour and myself were of the view that it might be possible to bring forward additional projects for which funds were not provided in the main estimates. We had in mind that in the various departments there might be projects that were in a state of readiness and that could be brought forward quickly as a means of helping to relieve unemployment if additional funds were provided. There will be some departments that are especially affected, for example public works, transport, northern affairs, forestry and others.
I will ask all departments to bring forward projects that have not been provided for in the main estimates and which are in a state of readiness and capable of being put into effect during this winter period. I hope these projects will come forward and, as the hon. member for Ontario said, they will go before treasury board for justification just as other projects go before treasury board. At the same time there will be the additional provision that these projects will have to be justified, in so far as the labour department is concerned, from two points of view. First of all they must have sufficient labour content to justify them as job creating projects. I can imagine a project that could be brought forward that could be justified on other grounds but would not create any substantial amount of employment, or create relatively little employment. That is what will be done.
Then, where will these projects go? I want to assure the house that they will not be placed in various parts of the country on the basis of arbitrariness or caprice. The Department of Labour has developed over the years a concept of surplus manpower areas, related to the extent and duration of unemployment in those areas. When the former government brought in its double depreciation program this definition was changed and enlarged to designate areas that would be eligible for the double depreciation allowances.
Now, as you know, the present government, in line with this concept, has mentioned on

Supply-Finance
several occasions that it is proposing programs for special application to designated areas. Currently this concept of areas of high unemployment as defined by the Department of Labour is under review. There will be, when that review is completed and approved by the cabinet, particular areas in the country that are to be eligible for these special programs. It is to these areas that this special program will be applied.


John George Diefenbaker: And not outside?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Not outside of those areas; it is not intended to use this money except to assist unemployment in a manner that will be defined by the government through its designation of these areas in elaboration of the concept that was followed by the former government.
It is my hope that the department will be able to bring forward a sufficient number of projects that all this item will be used up. However, I cannot give that assurance today because I do not know what projects will ultimately come forward and be approved. It would be my hope that a large number of projects would qualify so that this total amount would be used up. Certainly, in so far as I am concerned, if it proved successful I would not mind asking my colleagues to provide an additional amount.
In essence that is the extent of the program or the purpose of the program. I agree that there is a certain element of the unknown in this because I cannot assure the committee what particular projects will qualify or whether the total sum will be completely used up, or indeed whether it is sufficient. I have attempted to indicate the general policy that will apply under this particular item.


John George Diefenbaker: Will the minister allow a question? Has there been any projection made by the Department of Labour as to the expected unemployment next winter? Has that been done as yet, and if so what is the number?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, I should like to tell my hon. friend that I have not recently received from the officials of the department any indication as to the extent of winter unemployment. I must say that shortly after I entered this office I had a discussion with my officials and the intimation at that time was-this is subject to my own memory-that the problem of unemployment might be greater this fall or next winter than it had been. This was the original indication I received from the officials of my department.


Norman Platt Lambert: Perhaps during the course of his replies to other questions the minister

will tell us or have his colleague the Secretary of State do so, why this rather extraordinary procedure was adopted. This is an item of the unforeseen kind under the Department of Finance. Why not be straightforward and say this is a special project under the Minister of Labour?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps I could answer-


Norman Platt Lambert: If I may finish, this intrigues me a little because frankly the one who is going to be spending the money or to have the authority to spend the money is the Minister of Labour, acting on behalf of other ministers. Why not say so and put it in his own estimates, rather than have this usually minor catch-all provision under the Department of Finance?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should like to say that I have a great deal of sympathy for the hon. member for Edmonton West, because that was the original idea that was held when this project was first brought forward. I do not want to take refuge behind officials. I was an official once myself, and I always believed that the minister should take responsibility for these things. We were advised that from an administrative point of view it would be easier to do it this way. There is an "unforeseen" vote anyway in the department. I will come to the word "unforeseen" in a minute.
As the hon. member does know, because he has probably attended treasury board meetings assiduously, the amounts that are spent from the unforeseen vote are later charged back to the department concerned, and were the funds in the Department of Labour or any other department this course would mean another administrative process. We were advised that it would be easier administratively. It will be the intention, of course, to have these projects performed by the Department of Public Works or the department of northern affairs or the department under which they would normally come. The Department of Labour comes into the picture by giving a statement that there is enough labour content, that the project is in the right part of the country where the labour shortages are. Otherwise the projects will not be accepted by treasury board.
This is my understanding of the mechanics. The money will be paid out of this vote and then charged back to the appropriate department at a later stage in the financial procedures for accounting to parliament. It is just to conform with the normal mechanics of government. The hon. gentleman will see that because of the phrase "unforeseen" the wording of the vote is expanded so as to indicate that it is not wholly unforeseen. The only unforeseen element in it, as my hon.

friend has just explained, is that he is collecting a list of projects, but we cannot specify the projects until they have gone through scrutiny.
I think hon. members know that the government has not got power to get started on these things unless there is some vote from parliament authorizing it to do so. If we are to take a recess and not come back until the end of September, we would not want to hold up getting these projects ready and organized so that the actual work could start as early as possible in October and toward the beginning of November, when they would really be needed. I think that is the mechanical side of it.


Norman Platt Lambert: These items will be charged back to the department in the usual course of administration?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes.


Norman Platt Lambert: Then is it the intention of the government that parliament will be informed of this particular group of projects, rather than having them lumped together with others and then saying, "Oh, yes, we put up a building for the Department of Agriculture, but it appears under the usual construction items in the vote for the Department of Agriculture"?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I will give an undertaking on behalf of the government that either on the main unforeseen vote of the Department of Finance when it comes before the house, or on the vote of the Department of Labour, on the administrative item, whichever seems to be the more convenient and whichever comes at an opportune time, the government will give a full and detailed account of what projects have been selected, the progress that has been made on them, and the amounts involved.


Mr. Winkler:: Did I understand the Minister of Labour to say that it has been projected by his officials that they anticipate a higher degree of unemployment this fall?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, I replied to the right hon. gentleman who asked me whether my officials had given me any projection of prospects for unemployment, and I said I had no recent projection. However, I told my right hon. friend, and I repeat this subject to confirming it through notes which I have, that shortly after I became Minister of Labour it was indicated to me that the projections at that time were for greater unemployment this fall and possibly next winter.


Eric Alfred Winkler: That is exactly what I thought I heard. I do not want to become contentious today, because everything so far has been
Supply-Finance
in a more courteous vein than in the last few days, but this statement by the minister is of great significance, and accordingly I think I would agree that the way the spending of this money is being projected is probably a very good idea at this stage. Further, the way the matter was projected by the Secretary of State is worthy of consideration.
I do not want to beat a dead horse, but if the projections are in this direction then it seems to me both ministers should use their influence and good offices to get this sales tax measure removed. They would achieve a much higher degree of employment by doing that and would be much more popular throughout the country.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman-


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I do not want to take the floor from my hon. friend, but 1 was asked a question which I had hoped to answer. However, I interrupted my own statement to answer a question put by the right hon. Leader of the Opposition. In connection with the winter works program, which is a separate program from this particular one, I understand it is possible for an application to be made by a province on behalf of an unincorporated municipality.
For example, in certain parts of Newfoundland municipal organizations do not exist in the accepted sense, but upon inquiry I am informed that on at least one occasion it was possible for a province to make an application for assistance under the winter works program, on behalf of an unincorporated region, or an area that was not a municipality in the usual sense. That is the only information I can give to my hon. friend today, but I would be glad to make further inquiries so I could advise him at a later date.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I thank the minister for that explanation, because that has occurred in my constituency where the owners of privately owned irrigation systems have received assistance. There are a number of other bodies waiting to make application, and I will welcome further information.
The only other question I wish to bring again to the minister's attention concerns co-ordination and co-operation among the departments. I have a concrete illustration of officials of the Department of Agriculture urging certain people to increase production by extending and improving their irrigation system. I have proof of other departments telling them not to increase production and saying "Leave your system alone; we are going to flood you out." However, I found that the Department of Labour did give a grant to these very same

Supply-Finance
people, who received this contrawise advice, for the improvement of their irrigation system. I would like the minister to explain what is the co-ordination which makes it possible for three departments to be working in different directions with respect to the application of the winter works program.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I certainly agree with my hon. friend that it is very important that all departments of government co-operate with a view to adjusting and developing their programs, with the problem of unemployment and the creation of further employment in mind. At present there is an interdepartmental committee involved with the development of projects that might be applied under this particular item, and this committee has as its job the reviewing of all departments and the bringing forward of projects that might assist employment.
From that point of view it seems to me that this committee ought to be the vehicle through which the proper co-ordination of departments is achieved for the purpose of creating employment opportunities. I hope this particular emphasis will be increased rather than decreased, because I believe that further progress can be made along those lines. If that is what the hon. member has in mind, then I certainly accept his suggestion and agree with it fully.


Mr. Aiken:: I am sure, Mr. Chairman, all hon. members have excellent ideas on how this comparatively small sum of money could be spent, and assist the national economy, but I would like to point out one matter that would be especially valuable to the objective the minister has outlined. It concerns the construction of small tourist wharfs. Recently I put a number of questions on the order paper concerning a program of small docks and launching ramps projected for my own area and, I understand, for most other areas.
The answers I received to those questions indicate that there has been a very serious cut back in this program from what was planned last year. Most of these jobs are small-in that they would cost anywhere from $5,000 to $15,000. Most of them are in small communities, where the navigation for tourists particularly is uppermost in the minds of the local people. They meet most of the essentials the minister outlined; they are small jobs, a large number of which could be carried out with a small amount of money. I urge that a review of the Department of Public Works tourist works program be undertaken when this vote is passed, because I am given to understand that it was cut back very drastically, not at the request of anyone in particular but merely because the money was not available. If this money is

now being made available I should like to see it used in these very useful projects, which have always brought good results to small communities and have created employment because they involve the provision of local labour and materials.


Mr. Hales:: Mr. Chairman, I want to say just a few words on this vote. It seems to me a very unusual request is being put before parliament at this time. We are being asked to sign a blank cheque for $7 million, and we are not told what projects it is for or where those projects are to be located. I think we should know this. We may not agree with the projects or we may not agree with their location. In view of some of the sad experiences of this house recently with regard to government planning and the government then having to back track, and one thing and another, the minister should have come forward with some definite projects which they have in mind. He should tell us what they are and where they are to be located. This situation seems to me to be the same as that of a sales manager going to the manager of the company and saying, "I want $7 million", and when the manager asks him what it is for he says, "I do not know, but I think we will need it".
I think we are being placed in a rather unusual position in being asked to endorse this supplementary expenditure of $7 million. The minister, rather than cutting back the winter works program as he did, would have been better advised to leave it as it was. This in itself would have helped the employment situation quite a bit. I for one, Mr. Chairman, do not like the way in which we are being asked to accept this vote.


Edward Nasserden: Mr. Chairman, I find it very difficult to understand why the minister and the government have not been able to give us more information as to the projects they have in mind. The minister indicated that it is approximately three months since they were advised of the likelihood of an increase in unemployment this winter. Surely during that period some advice could have been received from the departments with regard to projects that were available. If I understood the minister correctly he indicated that there was already a shelf of projects available to be undertaken under this program in the various departments of the government. It may be a nagging thought, but we wonder why something has not been done along that line so the minister could have brought to our attention at this time some of the projects they are thinking of undertaking under the program.
I have one or two questions I would like to ask the minister. I wonder whether any limit

will be placed upon the amounts that will be available for any one project. Another question that might be of interest to the committee is whether there is any particular type of project that will be excluded from this particular grant of money. Perhaps the minister could answer those questions.


Philip Bernard Rynard: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister whether any of these projects had been planned prior to his taking over as minister. I would also like to ask him whether there has been any consultation with the provinces with regard to the spending of this money. I suggest to the minister that the great increase in boating demands a larger number of docks than we have at the present time. Some of these docks would be small, but in the building of them-and I could name dozens of places where they are needed-there is a great deal of labour involved. I would ask the minister to discuss with the Department of Public Works those projects that were cut off after having been planned, or which for some reason or other have been shelved, and to reconsider the building of these docks.


Mr. Howe (Wellinglon-Huron):: Mr. Chairman, the minister seems to be rather vague about the type of projects and works that may be carried out under this $7 million vote. I wonder whether he can give us any definite information as to what the percentage of labour content should be in a construction project that is being considered, to make it eligible to participate under this vote.


Mr. More:: Mr. Chairman, there has been reference during this discussion to the amount of $7 million being rather small. It may be, in the light of the problem that some members of the government foresee; but I think we should bear in mind that $7 million of the taxpayers' money is quite a large sum. In fact 30 years ago in my province of Saskatchewan, at which time we had close to the population we now have, that was half the budget. I hope the minister understands that the matters being put forward at this time are being put forward responsibly because of the apparent situation.
I am not quite clear about this and I want to ask the minister one question. Do I understand that this $7 million is desired for projects only in areas that qualify as surplus manpower areas? I am not clear on this point from what has been said so far. I formed that opinion, but some of my colleagues have indicated that this is not so. I am also interested in the matter of labour content, which I think is very important. Also, would the minister tell us whether this is to be
Supply-Finance
solely an expenditure by the federal government, or will any of it be used in sharing programs that will provide employment?


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Norman Platt Lambert: Mr. Chairman, may I call it
one o'clock-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Norman Platt Lambert: -because there are two or three other matters here that should be considered. I would ask hon. members opposite not to fret. They are asking us to accept this vote; a new procedure is being followed, and I think we should be quite careful with it. We can continue with it at 2.30.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is one o'clock.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.
The Chairman:: Order. The house in committee of supply, supplementary estimates (B), Department of Finance, vote No. 50b.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, after conferring with hon. gentlemen opposite at one o'clock it seems there is a feeling that it would be preferable to have more information about this particular vote than it is possible for the government to give at the present time, for reasons which my hon. friend the Minister of Labour gave and which, I think, are well understood to the hon. member for Ontario who formerly occupied that portfolio. The government has no desire whatsoever to ask the committee to accept any vote without adequate information and explanation. As I explained when the vote was introduced, it is not essential that it be passed at this time. It was thought it would be a convenient thing to have it passed because it is for the purpose, and solely for the purpose, of attempting to alleviate the exceptional unemployment which this country unfortunately has experienced for quite a number of years in the winter months. I do not anticipate there will be any shortage of funds before it is necessary for the government to ask once more for interim supply, particularly as I understand it will be necessary to do so as soon as the house resumes on September 30. Therefore I would ask that this item be allowed to stand and that we proceed to the Department of Transport.


Michael Starr: If I may say a word before you make your decision, Mr. Chairman, we realize the necessity that something be done during the winter months, as we have done in the

Supply-Transport
past, in order to alleviate the seasonal unemployment experienced. We put forward programs to this end. However, there is just not enough information available to members of this committee at this time for them to pass a definite sum of $7 million for something which may be determined in the future. My understanding is that these projects can be assembled and approved by treasury board and proceeded with, so that there will be no lessening of any attempt to do something about winter unemployment. These projects can be proceeded with, and when this parliament returns in the fall then the Minister of Labour can put forward the $7 million, or probably even more. From the projects listed and their estimated cost I think probably more will be needed, and every member of the committee will be well enough informed to be able to vote with some intelligence upon a sum of money such as has been suggested. So the work can go on and we can pass the estimates when we come back in the fall.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I just want to say one word. I can assure the hon. gentleman from Ontario and the committee generally that the government has no intention of seeking to take any partisan advantage in this matter whatsoever. I have indicated quite clearly that through interim supply the funds will be available which will be required in the meantime. I detect nowhere in the committee any opposition to the objective of this vote, so that I do not think the government should feel inhibited about going ahead with the program. If there is any dissenter in the committee I wish he would speak up, because I think every hon. member of the house is anxious to do everything he can to see that unemployment is reduced as much as possible in the winter months. Therefore the government will assume that getting interim supply next week gives it a mandate to go on with this program which was outlined by my hon. friend the Minister of Labour. Before we ask parliament finally to determine this matter, we will be very happy to let it stand over till more detailed information is available to parliament.


Lucien Lamoureux: Is it agreed that vote 50b stands?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT

[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration, $3,388,600.
Lucien Lamoureux: The committee will now proceed to the consideration of the estimates

of the Department of Transport, vote No. 1, departmental administration. Shall this vote carry?


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, during the question period today two questions were asked of me. At that time I assumed that the estimates were being called as the first item of business, immediately after the question hour, otherwise I would have answered one of them forthwith. The other one asked for information of which I was not sufficiently sure to give an accurate answer.
As to the question asked by the hon. member for Churchill having to do with the condition of the runways at the airport at The Pas, the situation is that these runways deteriorated very rapidly and present a real problem. At the moment engineers are trying to assess what requires to be done in the matter. There is not much more useful information I can give him at the moment.
As to the other question asked by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre concerning the ownership of the Tritonica, the owners are Snowberry Shipping Co., Hamilton, Bermuda. That company being a limited company, I do not know who the shareholders are but I have every reason to believe they are not Canadian.


Mr. Rapp:: Mr. Chairman, I welcome this opportunity to say a few words on the estimates of the Department of Transport. In my opinion this is one of the more important departments in the federal field, even more so because ever since the report of the Mac-Pherson royal commission was presented to the government it has been apparent that some of the suggestions or recommendations were of such magnitude and of such far reaching significance that it is almost unbelievable they would be implemented.
For instance, in Saskatchewan alone close to 14,000 farms will be affected by railway abandonment. More than 1,274 miles of railroad are likely to be abandoned and approximately 156 towns would be directly involved. In addition, 318 grain elevators would be put out of commission. All this presents a most serious problem as far as Saskatchewan is concerned. It was said at the turn of the century that if Canada was to take her proper place in the world, her commerce must be increased. The way of bringing this state of affairs about was to build these railroads so that grain could be transferred at low cost to foreign markets. The same basic situation prevails. The grain will still have to be brought to the seaports and if these railroads are abandoned, many farmers, in future, will not be able to deliver their grain.
There may be justification for abandoning some rail lines which run parallel to others,

say 15 miles apart. But if communities are left 50 or 60 miles from the nearest railroad, farmers are going to be hurt very badly. The benefits of the Crowsnest pass rates would disappear. This is a problem which cannot be handed to the transport commissioners for them to solve. It will have to be tackled as a matter of government policy. The government will have to see that these places are not left without a railroad service.
A few days ago I placed a bill before this house seeking to have a grain terminal built at Tisdale in an area which, in the past, could never deliver the same amount of grain as other areas in Saskatchewan. One purpose of my bill was to enable shipments to be expedited through Port Churchill. Should these abandonment proposals go through, the three western provinces would, I think, need many new terminals. In former years when there was a surplus of grain the federal government had to pay as much as $50 million in storage charges to the grain companies. A terminal built by the government would cost approximately $2 per bushel stored, a cost of, say, $10 million. In years of surplus the government would not have to pay for storage in federally-owned elevators and this saving would, in itself, justify building such terminals as I have proposed. It has been said that private companies would provide storage on railroads which have not been abandoned. This might be so, but some of these places could easily be 50 or 60 miles away from the farmer concerned. If it were not economic for private companies to build grain elevators at such places, then government terminals should be built.
It was thought by some people when I introduced my bill that this was an exaggerated idea and that the government could not build these inland terminals. But in the light of the fact that as many as 15,500 people might be affected, it is not hard to see that a time may be coming when governments will have to start building these publicly-owned terminals.
I know the minister is anxious to get his estimates passed and I do not want to elaborate on what I have said because I did present the case on an earlier occasion. At the same time I would urge the hon. gentleman to see that the abandonment of railway lines is not left for some such body as the board of transport commissioners alone to deal with. The government itself must outline a program to see that the farmers will not be deprived of their privileges, deprived of the benefit of the Crowsnest pass rates and deprived of the opportunity to get their grain to market as cheaply and efficiently as possible.
Supply-Transport


Edward Nasserden: I should like to congratulate the hon. gentleman on his appointment as Minister of Transport, one of the more important departments of government and one of particular interest to western Canada, especially at this time, for reasons which have just been given by my hon. friend from Humboldt-Melfort-Tisdale in his comments on rail line abandonment.
We in western Canada know there are some lines which will have to be abandoned because of economic reasons. At the same time we want to be sure that such abandonment as may take place does not in any way cut into the benefits now enjoyed by farmers in western Canada under the Crowsnest pass rates agreement. I wish to underline this statement because some of the intentions which have recently come to light indicate that the railways are not taking into consideration the long distances some farmers will have to cover in order to get their produce to the rail lines which remain in existence. I was greatly heartened by the minister's statement this morning during the question period when he indicated these were only intentions, and that many of these lines would not necessarily be abandoned in the period that lies ahead.
Another matter that is requiring a great deal of consideration at the present time is the continuing of the program for the elimination of grade crossings. As all hon. members know, during the past several years quite a problem has developed in the vicinity of many of our towns because of the use of diesel engines, in that sometimes there will be three or four engines pulling as many as 200 cars. It is a difficult problem both for the crew of the train and the people wishing to use the crossing. I urge the minister and the government to consider a greatly expanded program for the elimination of these crossings by providing underpasses or overpasses, whichever may be suitable. This might be one of the programs that might be undertaken in connection with the item that has just been allowed to stand.
There is another matter that comes under the Department of Transport in which there is a great deal of interest in my area. I refer to the provision of airstrips for private aircraft. Many people are looking to the government to provide greater assistance than in the past, in order to facilitate the development of transportation by this means. A greater number of people are purchasing their own aircraft, and many more would do so for their private use if they were assured that municipalities could secure some assistance in the provision of suitable airstrips. There are a number of other things I will

Supply-Transport
deal with when we are discussing the individual items, but that is all I wish to say at the moment.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, perhaps I should say something at this point, since the remarks pertaining to the railways are of a general nature and not specifically dealt with as such. I thank hon. members who have just spoken for their kind references to the department. There is one thing I think I should say about the remarks of the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort-Tisdale, in which he set out absolute figures as to the numbers of elevators involved in the abandonment of railways lines. I wish to warn against anyone accepting such figures as absolute because we do not yet know what lines, or what mileages are involved in any possible program of abandonment. Therefore any figures given now might very well prove to be inaccurate.
Hon. members are perfectly correct in describing the problem as one of very great importance to the prairie provinces. There is no doubt about that at all, and I do not think anyone is more willing to recognize that fact than I am. The situation is simply that in 1959, presumably because of the complexities of the problem, the former government appointed the MacPherson royal commission to examine railway transportation matters. The committee finally made a report and no action was taken before the former government left office. In fairness, however, I must say there is every indication that they were seeking to take action and had legislation on the subject in the course of preparation, although that legislation was never in any way made public.
Since taking office the present government has given a great deal of attention to this matter. As I indicated in my opening remarks on the estimates, the legislation on the subject which I hope to bring before this session of parliament is complex and difficult. On two major points it would involve some difference in thinking from what I take to be the position of the former government. That can be explained however either on the basis of a difference in point of view or as the result of further examination of a very difficult and complex subject. In any event, there is the clearest possible recognition of the fact that what is needed is to rationalize any program of rail abandonment, to coordinate it and carry it out in such a way as to result in the minimum of adverse consequences in the areas concerned. That is the purpose of the legislation.
It is not proper for me to anticipate at this time legislation not yet before the house, but in order to allay any misconceptions or
[Mr. Nasserden.l
undue fears about it I think I should give some indication of what our thinking is in preparing the legislation. Legislation is being prepared in close co-operation with the prairie provinces and the maritime provinces, these provinces being more directly concerned, and after consideration of the many representations received from some of the provincial premiers and their officials in the provincial departments dealing with this subject. I hope that when we have the legislation ready for submission to the house it will reflect adequate consideration of their points of view, and the great knowledge they have of this subject because of their concern with railway problems over the years.
There are, of course, other recommendations of tremendous importance in the MacPherson commission report which deal with the methods of setting freight rates. I am not unaware of the complexity of this subject and I hope I am not unaware of the things that will have to be avoided in bringing in new legislation on the subject. I thought I should make these remarks at this stage so that there would be no undue fear on the part of members or the people in the areas vitally concerned with this problem.


Léon Balcer: May I ask the minister a question on this very subject? In answer to a question on the orders of the day this morning he stated that the government had formed a cabinet committee to deal with branch line abandonments, and that this was in accordance with an election promise of the Prime Minister. We had a similar cabinet committee in the past when we were in office. That committee met with the premiers of the provinces to discuss this very subject and also had an opportunity to discuss it with officials of the provincial governments and other interested ministers. Can the minister tell us if the cabinet committee of the present government has had meetings with the premiers of the prairie provinces on the matter of branch line abandonment?


George James McIlraith: The meetings were conducted on an individual basis, not with the premiers collectively, and the form of meeting varied with the different provinces. In the case of Alberta I met with the premier and the provincial government agent alone. Then the officials continued to work on it at their level. In the case of Saskatchewan my colleagues and I on the transportation committee met with the premier of the province and a delegation. In the case of the province of Nova Scotia I may have been alone; I am not sure. Two representatives of the maritimes commission, I believe, were there as well. Then, in the case of Manitoba, I did not meet with

the premier, but what he described as I believe his working team of experts from the government met with the officials of the department. This has been done in other areas with the premiers concerned.
In other words I thought that because railway problems vary from province to province, it would be more effective to meet the provincial representatives individually, rather than meet a collective group. One province will be more concerned with one aspect of railway problems than another. I would not want it to be thought that the only railway problems discussed were those related to railway line abandonment. Problems inherent in rate making and things of that sort were also discussed at some length.


Léon Balcer: I gather from what the minister has said that the great plan announced by the Prime Minister during the election concerning this commission of the federal government to meet with the interested provinces has not materialized so far. The minister has been meeting from time to time with representatives of the provinces and the new government has been doing less, so far as talks with the provinces are concerned, than was being done under the old government?


George James McIlraith: No, Mr. Chairman, that would be a completely wrong assessment of the situation. I took the trouble, when starting into this subject, to check as closely as I could on what had been done by the former government in this area. I cannot speak for the former government. I can only say what I found when I took over and what information could be obtained from records and talking with people who were there at the meetings. The procedure we have adopted is the converse of that situation under the former government.
As I understand it, the former government confronted the provinces with proposals for legislation that were a fait accompli. The provinces were confronted collectively. What I have been seeking to do is the very opposite. In working this plan out-and we have tried to be very careful because I think it is of vital importance to the provinces-we tried to arrive at a plan that would meet the wishes of the provinces and other organizations as well, such as the wheat pools and others. We have brought them in to get their ideas, to discuss the kind of legislation that they think will meet the problems as they see them. While it is quite true we will have to take responsibility for the legislation, it should be legislation prepared as a result of consideration of the arguments that these representatives put forward. Furthermore, we are following this up by having the working people
Supply-Transport
of the department at the technical level follow the consultations through.
I am hoping that in this complex and difficult subject we will get better results in the end. In saying that, I do not mean to imply criticism of the former government in that respect. I must say that this method of proceeding was worked out while having the benefit of knowing how the former government had proceeded, and having the opportunity of deciding what I thought could be improvement in the method of dealing with the provinces on this point.


Léon Balcer: I do not want the minister to leave this impression-


Lucien Lamoureux: Order; I recognized the hon. member for Churchill.


Robert Simpson: There are several points I should like to bring to the attention of the minister while we are discussing item 1 of the estimates of this department. First of all, I should like to refer to the minister's reply concerning the condition of the runways at The Pas, Manitoba. I appreciate the information that the engineers are looking over these runways in an endeavour to see what can be done. I know the people will be gratified with this information. I understand also that since they are making this investigation we can be reasonably sure every effort will be made by them to turn in a report on the work which is necessary. However, I am hoping that, when it is proven this work is necessary, there will be no hold-up along the line anywhere. This is extremely important, not only to the people of The Pas but to various people in all parts of northern Manitoba.
The aircraft which has been making the regular scheduled flights into The Pas, as I mentioned this morning, was a Viscount, but it is unable to land at The Pas. The company that operates this service has inaugurated a shuttle service with DC-3's between Thompson and other points in the north, bringing passengers from those points into Flin Flon. They are just coping with the situation on a temporary basis, but that is disrupting many things right at The Pas airport.
As the minister probably knows, this airport was constructed somewhere around 1942, and was taken over by the Department of Transport at a later date. Since then, industry has built up in northern Manitoba and several small businesses have sprung up in the area of The Pas airport as a result of the increase in passenger services. If something is not done to have these services resumed as quickly as possible, these people are also going to suffer considerable financial loss. I would hope, therefore, the minister

Supply-Transport
would seriously consider this report when it is available and take the appropriate action as quickly as possible.
There is another airport in northern Manitoba which is extremely important, namely the one at Thompson, Manitoba. I understand that plans are under way for the hard surfacing of the runways at this airport. I ask for the utmost co-operation from the minister in seeing that there are no road blocks put in the way of this work going ahead as rapidly as possible. I do not know what the situation is at the present time. However, the last time I inquired it was hoped the hard surfacing could begin this year, and I sincerely hope that will be the case.
My congratulations go out to the officials of the minister's department for the very splendid work they have carried out on airstrips in northern Manitoba in recent years. At both Flin Flon and Lynn Lake we have new 5,000 foot runways, forming part of a network of airways throughout northern Canada. These strips are widely used and appreciated by the people of the area. They are a credit to the department, and I can assure the minister that the planning and engineering which went into them left nothing to be desired. Both the headquarters staff and regional staff at Winnipeg worked in close co-operation in doing this work.
However there is one thing which does create a problem for the local authorities in the operating and maintenance of these airstrips. It is a problem well known to the officials of the department, that which local authorities have of finding enough money to operate the strips.
I know there are regulations under which subsidies are granted, and in the case of Flin Flon everyone is quite happy with the type of system that is in effect. In fact, much to the surprise of some people, I believe they have found it economically profitable to operate the airport there. As against that there are places like Lynn Lake which have repeatedly sought, and in some cases received, assistance in the form of snow removal equipment for the maintenance of runways. This is a bigger item than a lot of people realize because the runways must be maintained in perfect condition throughout the winter. Snow removal must be kept up almost daily and it becomes very expensive.
I would ask the minister to give this problem his utmost consideration, and when requests of this nature come in I would ask that he send recommendations to the officials concerned to co-operate in every possible way.
I have found that many small places in the north which have local airstrips also have very ambitious flying clubs which provide
fMr. Simpson.]
good community service to adjacent areas. These clubs in many cases are desperately in need of some sort of assistance, and I do not know where else they can get it except from the department. However, from inquiries which I have made, I have discovered that the regulations do not permit the department to grant some of the assistance which has been requested.
As an example I mention Swan River in Manitoba, where on many occasions members of the local flying club have in emergencies flown patients out to various hospitals, and have provided other public services to the community. The club has been requesting the department to supply it with a temporary lighting kit so that the airfield, when necessary, could be used for night flying. But the regulations do not permit the department to supply any equipment of that nature to anything other than a municipally administered airport, or to a Department of Transport airport. This is something which should be examined so that if by chance the department has surplus equipment of this kind it could be made available to recognized and authorized flying clubs, on either a loan or rental basis, as the department may see fit.
This is very important as such clubs cannot expect too much aid from municipalities. They are not costing the treasury of Canada anything, and small requests of this nature should be met if at all possible.
There is only one other matter I wish to mention, and I shall be brief because I understand the hon. member for the Northwest Territories has something to say about it. It has been suggested to me on many occasions, particularly in the north, that the possibility be examined of providing, under conditions set out by the department, some search and rescue, or homing equipment for private aircraft operating in the northern areas.
Hon. members who represent northern constituencies have from time to time experienced the anxiety, and in many cases the tragedy, of planes going down in the bush-land. In many cases long searches are necessary before these planes and the survivors, if any, are found. Many of the bush flyers have brought it to my attention that if this equipment were installed on their airplanes very little time would be lost in finding the wreckage if they were forced down. However the small operators feel this equipment is a little too expensive.
One of the main items of expense arises from the fact that the batteries are costly and do not last very long. However I understand that many of these so called SARAH sets are available, and if the Department of Transport could compel all pilots flying in

designated areas to have this equipment, and further, could supply it to them on a loan basis, we might find that the savings which would result from the money now spent on air search and rescue would be sufficient to cover a plan of this nature.
In conclusion I would like to mention rail transportation. I shall not deal with the freight rate situation, as I dealt with this some weeks ago when speaking in the house on the desirability of equalization of freight rates. At that time there was some opposition from the parties to my left because I did not offer any concrete solution for the problem, but I did point out that it was gone into very thoroughly by the MacPherson royal commission, and I said certain of its recommendations should be examined closely.
In my area there is little highway competition for the Canadian National Railways, and in practically every place where there is no competition from highway traffic there is no free pickup and delivery of express or l.c.l. freight. The moment the road goes in, the railway generally puts in a system of free pickup and delivery of express and l.c.l. freight. I think this is a matter that should be looked into by the minister so that all points served by Canadian National Railways receive the same consideration in this regard.


Mr. Priliie:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to take a few moments to bring to the attention of the minister an airport problem concerning the greater Vancouver area. Before I do that, my colleague the hon. member for Port Arthur, who is not here this afternoon, asked me to ask the minister when he may expect a specific answer to his question No. 963 on the order paper.
In recent years the air traffic at the Vancouver international airport has become such that there has been a move to remove the smaller, light aircraft away from that very busy airport. With this object in mind, a few years ago a new airport site was selected for light aircraft at a place called Pitt Meadows about 25 miles from Vancouver. The site is not a very good one in the view of many people. The body charged with regional planning for that area of British Columbia, the lower mainland regional planning board, specifically recommended against the choice of this site for more than one reason. They felt it was not a good site for aircraft and it would be spoiling an otherwise good industrial site. The minister has recognized the fact that it is not a very good site. He was out there last week to open this new, light aircraft airport, and this is the report contained in the Vancouver Province of July 22 in connection with that visit:
Supply-Transport
Transport minister George Mcllraith said before the opening ceremonies that he did not know why Pitt Meadows was chosen for an airport.
''It was one of the things I inherited from the last government", he said.
The light aircraft operators are divided on this topic. One group has moved to the new airport and another group, the B.C. aircraft owners and pilots association, has refused to move. There is another airport available in the area. This is at Boundary Bay, British Columbia, which was built during the war as an air force training airport. It is a very large site. In recent years it has been used as a wireless station by the Department of National Defence. The light aircraft association has asked the Department of National Defence if they will give up part of this site -it is no longer used as an airport-for the use of light aircraft. It is much more handy to the main population centre and I believe it has much less rainfall than the site at Pitt Meadows. The Department of National Defence have replied that they cannot give this site up, for security reasons, because this wireless station is supposed to be so very secure. In order to test the security of this installation the Vancouver Province newspaper sent two reporters out there. They were allowed past the gate without giving in a pass. They drove around this supposedly secure place. They took pictures. They drove at 60 miles per hour on runways, and they eventually left without giving in a pass. The matter was brought to the attention of the Department of National Defence and the commissionaire on the gate was fired. However, the reporters made the point that civilians go in and out all the time and that just a mile from there is a small, private airfield with 25 aircraft which fly over this site all the time. The point, of course, is that it really does not need to be so secure as the Department of National Defence would have us believe.
The B.C. aircraft owners and pilots association have suggested to the Department of National Defence that some arrangement could be made whereby this site could be used both for the wireless station and by the light aircraft owners. I realize that this involves the Department of National Defence, but it also involves the Department of Transport and I hope the minister will speak to his colleague about this matter at some time. The Vancouver Province of July 16 summarized the situation in this way, in question and answer form, putting forth the views of the Department of National Defence and those of the light aircraft owners:
Here are the arguments:
Government: It would cost too much money to move the installation at Boundary Bay and a better site is not available anyway.

Supp ly-Transport
Pilots: Don't move it; there are 825 acres and lots of room for both of us. Just fence it at our expense.
Government: The runways are in bad condition and not suitable for landing small aircraft.
Pilots: The runways are excellent, once a few weeds have been removed.
This resulted from the testimony of the reporters who looked at it:
Government: The small aircraft would represent a threat to national security; it is a wireless station-not an airport.
Pilots: It has always been an airport and the presence of a public skating rink, and hundreds of civilians has not been termed a risk up to now.
Government: The flight of small aircraft will cause an electrical disturbance that will interfere with the wireless operation.
Pilots: There are 27 aircraft based about a mile away and have been for some time. The field is in the flight paths of a great deal of activity from Vancouver airport and the Seattle-Tacoma airport.
Government: There is too much fog at Boundary Bay and the weather conditions are not as good as at Pitt Meadows.
Pilots: There is far less fog at Boundary Bay; Ladner nearby gets only 36.23 inches of rain a year as compared to 88.94 inches at Pitt Polder near Pitt Meadows.
What makes this a rather important problem in our area is that the lower mainland of British Columbia is a relatively land poor area. It is surrounded by mountains, the ocean and includes the United States border, and there is not very much land. This site would, I am sure, make an excellent site for light aircraft. The people who use these aircraft generally live in the metropolitan area. They would not have so far to travel, and the site is a better one from the point of view of weather.
I would conclude my remarks by appealing to the minister to consult with his officials and with his colleague the Minister of National Defence to see whether the two positions cannot be reconciled. The light aircraft owners have suggested a means whereby the wireless station could be fenced and made perfectly secure, and the runways could be used by the light aircraft owners. I would hope the minister will give this matter some consideration and speak to the Minister of National Defence about it.


Mr. Kennedy:: Mr. Chairman, what I have to say concerns what was discussed a little earlier, the question of railway line abandonment. This is a matter which is not on nearly as large a scale in my area as it is in western Canada, but it is none the less important to us in the east. At the present there is an application before the board of transport commissioners to abandon about 25 miles of railway line between the villages of Tata-magouche in the constituency of Colchester-Hants and Scotsburn in the constituency of my colleague the hon. member for Pictou. This

rail line abandonment would isolate some communities on that north shore, and-and this is important-it will isolate a farmers' co-operative which deals in western feed grains.
Also of great significance is the fact that this line connecting, as it does, Oxford and Stellarton, provides an alternate route into the province of Nova Scotia. Although it is not of the standard of a main line, it has been used on many occasions as an emergency route when there has been a blockage of the main line. In the last few days there was a serious derailment on the main line and according to press reports passenger traffic was routed over this alternate route. If this abandonment is allowed it will remove 25 miles from the centre of this line and will break this link. I think it is rather important to remember that not only would this link serve southern and eastern Nova Scotia in an emergency, but it would also connect the routes leading into Newfoundland. I might add I noted yesterday that the municipal council of Colchester county endorsed a resolution opposing this abandonment. I just wanted to bring this matter to the attention of the minister so that when consideration is given to the over-all problem of rail line abandonment he will also consider this question, not only in the light in which it is held locally but also having in mind the fact that it is an alternative route into that part of the country.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, perhaps I might answer one or two of these questions now, and I will try to do so as concisely as possible. One matter I forgot to mention to the hon. member for Three Rivers is that the committee on transportation, now in full operation, meets, I think, what was put forward by the Prime Minister in the election campaign. I did examine the point quite carefully and am satisfied about that.
The hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond raised the point about the satellite air station at the international airport at Vancouver. The problem there is quite simple. There is a great deal of traffic involving large aircraft coming into Vancouver airport. The take-offs and landings of small aircraft which use the satellite airport have been as high as 620 in a single day, so that the hon. member can see the need for taking action. The former government did take action, it is true, but I did not want to take the responsibility for the accuracy of the report in the Vancouver Province because I have not seen the report. It may or it may not be accurate. I did mention the subject when opening Pitt Meadows airport on Saturday, but I do not recall any reference to the

subject mentioned by the hon. member. He referred to light aircraft. Great numbers of these light aircraft people are very enthusiastic and keen about the Pitt Meadows airport. The small aircraft owners association, headed by a gentleman, who I think I can say without impropriety, was rather vocal on the subject, for some reason refuse to accept the simple statement of fact that it is not possible to have the military air base at Boundary Bay vacated for use as a statellite airport. That is not possible. I tried to make that point clear in all interviews, whether with the press or the radio and television people, in Vancouver on Saturday. Flying into that airport and using only part of the field, and so on, is not possible. The unfortunate part of it is that the Department of National Defence has not been able to give as fully as it might wish, the reason it is not possible to make this airport available; I think I should make that clear.
While I said it is quite true that the Pitt Meadows airport was chosen by the former government and work was undertaken on it, I can see nothing in the files which would lead me to believe other than that there was very careful consideration of the alternative. The other alternative was to locate in an area where there are a great number of residents, and the university there would have been interfered with rather seriously. I am sorry that this lack of understanding about the non-availability of Boundary Bay airport has not been made clear before, and I hope my remarks today will tend to provide an appreciation of that point.
As to the reference to distance with regard to the Pitt Meadows airport, as the hon. member knows from living in the area, there are new road construction programs under way in Vancouver. Accessibility to the airport from the centre of the city on the new roads I am sure will be much better than the accessibility of the airport with the existing roads today.
The hon. member for Colchester-Hants made reference to rail line abandonment in his particular area. I have to confess that I simply have no knowledge of that particular abandonment, and I would be less than frank if I said otherwise. But I can tell him that I am a little partial to his part of the country and I would like to make a personal inspection of it one of these days. I could think of nothing more pleasant. In any event the matter is before the board of transport commissioners at the present time, and I hope he has made his point of view clear in the appropriate way.
Another hon. member asked me about a question on the order paper; I have forgot-
Supply-Transport
ten the number. I expect the answer to that rather lengthy question to be available next week.
The hon. member for Churchill asked about the Thompson airport and the paving contract. The tender call for that will be going out next week.
(Translation):


Mr. Ricard:: Mr. Chairman, the few observations I have to make this afternoon might be more properly made at a hearing on bilingualism and biculturalism, but since they concern more particularly the C.N.R., I shall make them now.
As the Minister of Transport (Mr. Mcll-raith) is aware, I have exchanged a few letters with him where I suggested to give a more bilingual character to the administration and the operation of the railway. In fact, I think we could use the national railways as a means to promote bilingualism all across Canada.
But, when you travel by C.N.R., you are forcefully made aware of the fact that you are entering wagons which are owned by only one group of the population and I think that the use of a little more French besides English would further the cause of bilingualism. If he did that, the minister would create quite a reputation for himself as champion of that cause, and some of the honour would be reflected on his parliamentary secretary (Mr. Cantin) who could claim also some credit for himself.
In the answers the minister sent me, I found nothing to show that my suggestions would be welcome. And if I raise the matter in the house, it is because I think the minister answered in such vague terms that I cannot know whether the responsible authorities will take them into consideration.
In fact, if I refer to the letter the minister wrote me on June 17, 1963, here is what I find:
Be assured that I will be glad to take it up with the management of the company right away.
And in his letter of July 3, 1963, the minister told me:
Be assured that I immediately brought to the attention of the management of the company your additional remarks.
Mr. Chairman, what I would like to know from the minister is whether he has given instructions or whether he intends to give any to the appropriate authorities of the Canadian National Railways in order that, in

Supply-Transport
the future, posters, boards and signs be written in both French and English, in the stations and on the C.N.R. cars.
It seems most abnormal, for instance, to see in all C.N.R. stations in the province of Quebec signs and posters in English only; since the present government has decided to create a royal commission on bilingualism and biculturalism, I believe that it has a wonderful opportunity to give convincing concrete evidence of its desire to take action.
In addition, I say once more to the minister that he would acquire an enviable reputation for himself and for his parliamentary secretary if he acted in furtherance of the various suggestions I made to him.
(Text):


Mr. Rideout:: In view of the fact that I have the honour to represent the largest railway terminal in Canada on a per capita basis I feel that I should draw a few matters to the attention of the minister. First of all, I should like to express my thanks and appreciation for the fine co-operation I received from the hon. gentleman's predecessor, the minister of transport in the former government. He was always most genial and kind and he understood my many problems.
During his period in office we discussed, among many other things, the lengthening of the runways at Moncton airport and I was given to understand that they would be lengthened this year. However, I am afraid that provision for this will not appear in the estimates. Moncton airport is one of the largest in Canada on the basis of arrivals and departures. It is my understanding that we rank eighth. It was clearly brought home to us not long ago, however, that modern facilities at Moncton are sadly lacking. We had arranged a board of trade mission to the old country and it was necessary for us to leave from the city of Halifax because the airstrip at Moncton was not adequate to handle DC-8 aircraft. I bring this to the attention of the minister because this airport serves not only Moncton and the surrounding area but also, to a large degree, the province of Prince Edward Island as far as air travel is concerned.
Our terminal facilities are antiquated. They are not in keeping with today's standards. The minister has told me that some effort will be made to deal with this in 1964. Restaurant facilities are in another building and passengers are called upon to climb several flights of stairs before they can get coffee or a meal. This is certainly not the situation in other parts of Canada, and it should not be the case at an airport such as Moncton, having regard to the volume of business which is done there.
Now I should like to say a few words about the Canadian National Railways, because we have some 7,000 employees of the Canadian National in my constituency. I know we are all very much interested in employment at this time. I have taken note of the overtures made by the city of Winnipeg concerning the removal of terminal maintenance facilities from Winnipeg to Montreal. I should like to protest a move which took place some three years ago which resulted in our Canadian National passenger car shop going from Moncton to Winnipeg, closing out our entire operation in this regard. Fifteen years ago we had about 3,000 people working in our main shop. Now we have about 850. I should like to draw the attention of the minister to the importance of having this shop reopened. Passenger traffic has increased by 250 per cent in the Atlantic region and this work should be done in Moncton. It would not only be good for employment there but it would mean a saving to the C.N.R. of the cost involved in transporting equipment to Winnipeg and then returning it to Moncton for service.
Another matter I should like to mention concerns the contract entered into by the C.N.R. under which the company was to develop 25 acres on Moncton's main street. This work was to be completed by June 1, 1963. There has already been built, and I commend those responsible, an eight storey palatial office building in Moncton which certainly is a credit to our city. But when is this $15 million development project to go forward? Work on this project has been stopped without any reason being given. People in my constituency are continually asking me when it will go forward or whether a hitch has occurred in the plan. No distinct stand seems to have been taken by the railway company. Work has been started on the C.N.R. station. I have received protests from the city council to the effect that this station is far too small and that it will not accommodate the present passenger traffic, let alone the traffic which they expect in the future.
A number of hon. members on the other side have spoken about rail abandonment proposals. Perhaps to a lesser degree, we in the maritime provinces have a similar problem. In some cases the abandonment of lines may be necessary but I feel that in others the board of transport commissioners are too hasty in approving abandonment proposals. I do not think there is any doubt that the board is pro-railway. They go out and hold hearings. Then they come back to Ottawa and pontificate. They say: "Yes, you had' better abandon that line". It all seems a form they run through. The line is abandoned, many people are put out of work and commerce is in some cases reduced to a standstill.

I am sorry the hon. member for Port Arthur is not here today. He referred to me a couple of weeks ago in the course of some comments he had to make about the morale of railway workers. I have to agree with him that it is not as it should be. This is not due to top management but rather to the fact that in some cases men with 25 or 30 years service have been laid off. This is not a good situation. Hence we have bills coming before this house saying that people who have been hurt in this way should receive compensation.
I know of no finer way in which to relieve unemployment than to use this crown corporation. It is fairly well organized and has been going on for a great number of years. There are many avenues in the lumber industry and in other industries across Canada that are yet untouched and which Canadian National Railways could assist in developing. If we are going to close down railway lines all the time in this young country of ours it is a very great mistake. We have found that out already in many cases. In some cases where lines have been abandoned it has been revealed later that they never should have been closed down. However, the railways will not admit this. These are a few of the smaller items that I should like to draw to the attention of the minister.


Eugène (Gene) Rhéaume: Mr. Chairman, in rising to speak on this item I feel I do so from a good position, because I am the representative of a constituency of 1,300,000 square miles, give or take 50,000 or 60,000, roughly the size of the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia put together. I mention this because if the Northwest Territories have anything in real abundance it is distance, and this has tremendous implications for the future development of the aviation industry in the Northwest Territories. In my view the Minister of Transport has an opportunity to play a vital role in assisting in the development of the 40 per cent of Canada that lies north of the 60th parallel.
At the present time almost all phases of development in the Canadian north are directly dependant on aircraft. The great surge of northern development occurred in the wake of the use of aircraft. It is probably true to say that every producing mine in the Northwest Territories owes its existence to the fact that aircraft were available initially to take in prospectors to remote areas and then played a vital and continuing role during the construction and operation phases of all mining communities in the north.
In terms of government services, and the minister is well aware they have been expanded many times over during the past five
Supply-Transport
or six years, every one of our major services in the north is directly dependant upon aircraft. Our health services are dependant on aircraft for the transportation of hundreds of people from the remote areas of the constituency to larger centres for medical treatment. Our educational system in the Northwest Territories is dependant on aircraft to be able to move hundreds of children thousands of miles each fall into the larger centres where there are schools, and to return them home in the spring for their summer holidays. Government administration could not be carried on in the Canadian north without aircraft.
I have risen at this time to ask the minister a few questions in relation to aircraft. The first thing to which I should like to refer is a matter that was raised by the Minister of National Defence relating to the partial closing down of the distant early warning line in the far north. The closure of some of these sites raises the question of alternative uses. I think it also points up that the writing is on the wall so far as the remainder of the distant early warning line is concerned. I hope that the Minister of Transport will be in continuing consultation with the Minister of National Defence with regard to alternative use of the hanger facilities and refueling and telecommunication facilities that the distant early warning line could provide for commercial operators who are attempting to provide service in the far north.
I would be interested in having the minister tell me something about his plans for airports. Many northern communities are at present cut off from all medical and other supplies for almost four months of the year during the periods of freeze-up in the fall and break-up in the spring. In 1963, when it is possible to send a cosmonaut in orbit around the world in one day, then send up a girl to find out how he is doing and retrieve both of them safely several days later within a few yards of waiting newsmen, I find it inconceivable that thousands of our northern Canadian citizens should be in precarious isolation for 25 per cent of the year.
I suggest to the minister that a massive program of airport development is now required for the far north. I am not referring to paved runways with strobe lights. I am talking about smaller emergency type strips adjacent to the 20 or 30 northern communities that have absolutely no airport facilities whatsoever at the present time. I would hope that the Minister of Transport would also be in close consultation with the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources with a view to co-ordinating work projects in the north to provide these emergency airstrips.

Supply-Transport
I should like the minister to support an increased program of aids to navigation. By this I mean nothing more than the provision of navigational beacons. I should like to give the minister one example of what I have in mind. During the spring campaign I had occasion to fly in a single engine aircraft from Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, 600 miles due east to Baker Lake, Northwest Territories. The present aids to navigation in that entire 600 mile trip consist of the Thelon river which has been there many thousands of years. The position of travellers in the Canadian north, who quite frequently go on trips that take them thousands of miles, is rendered that much more insecure and unsafe by the failure to provide adequate aids to navigation. I would hope that the minister would have the appropriate section of his department look into the possibilities of providing better service to the bush pilots by making available information on such things as upper atmosphere winds.
A matter that is, perhaps oddly enough, of immediate concern to those of us who make our homes in the western part of the Canadian north is the fate of the municipal airport at Edmonton. I would hope that the minister's department could clear up this matter rather quickly. As he may be aware, those people who live along the Mackenzie river depend almost entirely on the service provided by Pacific Western Airlines flights to bring them mail and supplies. It is important to Pacific Western Airlines and therefore to the people of the north that the municipal airport in the heart of downtown Edmonton be available. It is important to us, because we depend on arrangements for the transportation of supplies on a daily basis to Pacific Western Airlines at the municipal airport for furtherance to the north. We consider that any move to Nisku airport would increase the costs of freight handling for us. We know for certain it would be much more inconvenient.
I should like to have the minister tell us something about the plans of his department for the provision of safety equipment for commercial operators in the Northwest Territories. Some time ago I received a return to a question concerning the cost of R.C.A.F. search and rescue operations in the Northwest Territories. The total cost in 1962 was well over $250,000. I predict that in 1963, R.C.A.F. search and rescue costs in the Northwest Territories alone will exceed $1 million. It seems to me that the Department of Transport must examine this very carefully to find if there might be a way of not only providing commercial operators in the far north with safer equipment in terms of rendering air travel more secure, but also in terms of saving the Canadian taxpayer a good many dollars.

I also raised a question some time ago about the firefighting equipment available at those air terminals that are in existence along the Mackenzie river. The answer I received was that the standard of equipment at these airports was not adequate to meet the minimum standards of the department, but that the department would look into it. I hope this situation can be corrected immediately, especially at a time when Pacific Western Airlines, who serves the western part of the north, are providing DC-6 service on a daily basis to many of our northern communities. We would hope the department would take immediate steps to provide the kind of firefighting equipment necessary at the terminals at which these aircraft arrive.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I want to make a passing reference to the resignation of Mr. Paul Davoud, who was chairman of the air transport board and who was known by a great many northerners. We notice his resignation with some regret. His efforts as chairman of the air transport board were appreciated by everyone who was interested in northern Canada. We hope his successor will bring to the position the same kind of enthusiasm and effort to a very demanding job.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I should like first to congratulate the minister upon his appointment and to thank him for his prompt attention to any matter I have brought to his notice. I should like also to say I appreciate the co-operation and good work of the permanent senior officials in Ottawa and throughout the country. I might say these gentlemen carry on the administration of this department behind the scenes. They are like flowers that bloom unseen and waste their sweetness on the desert air. Frequently I have to deal with matters of national and international scope, but this afternoon, because of the nature of these estimates and the type of constituency I represent, I will apologize, Mr. Chairman, if you think on occasion I am somewhat parochial.
I am going to deal with my complaints in sequence because I think the minister can deal with them better under these circumstances, and this method avoids interruption when the items arise. The first matter I wish to bring to the attention of the minister is the question of continued passenger service on the Kettle Valley Railway. I have mentioned it on previous occasions in this house. I continue to receive letters in this respect from chambers of commerce, trade unions, women's organizations, and boards of trade, and they all say, "Whatever you do, Bert, don't give up on the Kettle Valley Railway." So, I am raising this matter.
I wish to bring to the minister's attention certain changed circumstances that have to

be considered by the board of transport commissioners when they are giving consideration to the application of the Canadian Pacific for the withdrawal of this service. I have a letter here from the local chairman of the brotherhood of railway trainmen. I should like to quote from one paragraph, because this information changes the whole circumstances and removes the reason given for changing the service some years ago. This information removes the argument advanced by the Canadian Pacific at that time. In so far as the financial argument is concerned, if the company would not divorce the passenger service receipts from the revenues of the company as a whole, this is one of the most profitable lines in Canada. The company is located in an area which returns the greatest profit to the C.P.R. because of its association with Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company. I quote the following paragraph from the letter from W. H. To whey:
The R.C.M.P. have taken off all railroad bridge guards and the C.P.R. will have all walking track patrols taken off by August 15, 1963. This means that after August 15,	1963, the areas between
Nelson, Midway and Trail will be back to the normal police protection, the same as it was back in 1952. There will be no rail bridge guards or track guards or patrols night or day.
In other words, Mr. Chairman, this means we have returned to normal in Kootenay West so far as railway traffic operations are concerned and the hazards that were related thereto. I do hope the board of transport commissioners will give consideration to these changed circumstances when considering this application. I am not going to repeat my arguments. The minister knows this is the only all-weather transport available to 100,000 people in the interior of British Columbia. The population is producing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of material from the mines, smelters, forests and agriculture. I do hope that the minister will see my point of view. My spirits have risen since his appointment. I hope he will discuss this matter with the board of transport commissioners so that we will have at least a daily train service with one day coach and a combination cafe and sleeping car to make certain the people of southeastern British Columbia will be able to travel under all weather conditions. Because of weather conditions, air transport is somewhat irregular in the winter months. Because of winter conditions our roads, particularly over the Princeton highway, are blocked on some occasions. I wish therefore, to make another appeal to the minister and I trust this will be my last.
I should like to direct the minister's attention to the excellent administration of the Castlegar airport which is owned by the 28902-5-171
Supply-Transport
municipalities of Nelson, Castlegar and Kin-naird. There has been a great deal of voluntary labour put into this airport. I like to see that. I think it is good and should be encouraged, especially when we have many citizens who are willing to devote their time and money to certain local projects. I know the department has rendered excellent assistance. There have been improvements in recent months and these are appreciated by the airport committee and by the communities that are dependant upon that airport. But I do suggest, because of the uncertain traffic during winter months, further consideration be given to the study of facilities that would make it possible for traffic to land even when the mountains are covered with clouds. At the present time no aircraft attempts to land if the clouds are lower than the surrounding peaks. I understand that problem has not been settled. It is particularly difficult in this district because of the terrain and the narrowness of the valleys. However, I do urge, on behalf of the different communities concerned, further consideration and study to improve this situation.
Now, in addition to that, because of the terrain and nature of our country, we have -I do not know their technical designation because I am a backwoodsman and I find these technical terms difficult to grasp-airports for the landing of aircraft on water, when they are equipped with water skis. We have one at Nakusp and at one or two other places. When these are being proposed I urge the minister to give assistance by way of advice in respect to their location and maintenance. The local groups who build them do so at no cost to the department or the people of Canada, and they are providing a very necessary service. The same applies to one or two smaller ports for planes that land on wheels. The officials of the department should render any assistance they can with respect to the location of these fields and their operation.
I have found in one or two cases that the people concerned were rather ignorant of the regulations and things of that sort. This is not an expensive matter and it is a service that would be much appreciated.
In recent months and years certain companies in the forest industry have been granted booming rights in bays along the Kootenay lake, the Arrow lakes and the Columbia river. This is very necessary for the storing of logs, but I would ask the minister to tell his officials to make certain that the navigable channels on the Columbia river, between Revelstoke, and Arrowhead are kept open for water craft, and to see

Supply-Transport
that no booms are allowed to be strewn across these channels which would prevent craft travelling through them.
Where this has happened it is possibly due to the oversight of some local official who does not understand the law or the regulations, and I urge that the officials be advised to see to it that these booms do not atfect the navigable portions of the channels.
A year or two ago I brought up the necessity of having luminous plates placed on booms and boom anchors. These anchors are usually logs tied to a cement post in the bottom of a lake, or are heavy objects to which the booms are chained. When the booms are taken away a single log is left, and in some cases these single logs have proved to be a great hazard to navigation.
There are several near navigable channels on Kootenay lake, and the companies now operating on that lake place these phosphorescent plates on stationary booms and boom anchors. They can be seen at night by people navigating small craft, and I ask that the same regulations be enforced on the Arrow lakes and the Columbia river. The number of these booms is increasing, and sometimes the single anchor is left a long distance from shore and cannot be seen on a dark night by persons navigating small craft. All that is required is that a plate be attached to either side of the anchor or boom.
Another matter which should receive attention is the acceptance of responsibility for the clearing of snow from wharves, and the sanding of wharves. I am speaking of wharves constructed by the federal government, which I understand come under the administration of the Department of Transport, which usually uses the local public works supervisor, or someone like that, as its agent.
Some of these wharves have a 10 per cent grade and are used by people loading ships and barges. They become very icy and dangerous, and no one has assumed responsibility for clearing the snow from all these wharves. I think the department should make certain that in all cases they are properly cleared of snow and sanded when required for the safety of the public. In some instances the provincial authority does this work because the local foreman sees it as his responsibility; but this is not certain enough.
I also suggest signs should be placed on all wharves to prevent caterpillars, used by logging companies, travelling over them and damaging them with their very sharp cleats. Most of the operators are very good in that respect and lay down planks so that the cats can load onto barges or ships without cutting a wharf to pieces. But it only takes two or three trips with a 35 ton or 40 ton cat to rip
[Mr. Herridge.l
the deck of a wharf to pieces. In this connection more attention should be paid to the enforcement of regulations governing travel of caterpillars over government wharves, because with their large cleats they can do so much unnecessary damage.
I am trying to be as brief as possible, as usual, but there is another matter I wish to bring to the minister's attention, concerning the operation of the Great Northern Railway between the international boundary and Nelson. This railway is owned in the United States and administered in Canada by a superintendent in the United States. I have found on one or two occasions, and in fact reported it to the board of transport commissioners, that the superintendent has ignored the request of ranchers along the railway to undertake to do the fencing required by law. In fact ranchers have lost cattle which were killed on the track because the Great Northern Railway, United States owned and administered, does not provide the fencing that is required by law.
I suggest that the minister's officials keep a close watch on the superintendent who is in charge of this division in Canada. He has admitted some responsibility but is a little inclined to drag his feet. I suggest that the minister give him a bit of a shove from behind.
Another thing I wish to bring to the minister's attention concerns the freight rates charged on this railway. There are people in the area who ship forest products on it, particularly fence poles and posts to the prairies, but the freight rates charged by the Great Northern to transport these forest products from a point near the international boundary to Nelson, where they are transferred to the Kettle Valley Railway, are so high in relation to the rest of the transportation that it makes it almost impossible for these persons to operate at a profit.
I had one letter of complaint in the early part of the session with regard to this matter, and I have had another letter from a second man since then. The board should keep a sharp eye on the administration of this small railway-it is about 30 miles long-to see that Canadian citizens' rights are not overlooked, just because the line is administered by officials in the United States.
There are a large number of launch clubs in the Kootenays. In fact people have taken a greatly increased interest in small water craft since the second world war, and groups have formed clubs to develop this interest as recreation for the people of the communities concerned. In addition there are large numbers of commercial craft, small tugs and things

of that sort, which have replaced the stern-wheelers that operated on the rivers up until 1957.
A great number of people have been concerned about the possibility of accidents with these small craft. In fact we had one unfortunate drowning a year or two ago because a boat was not equipped with the equipment required by law at that time. I urge that the department take a strong stand with respect to regulations governing the equipment that should be carried by these small craft, and governing their operation. I think the police get their best co-operation from the organized groups of launch clubs and organizations of that kind. The need for this type of strict enforcement is growing daily; that is why I bring it to the attention of the minister. I know he is interested, and I know about the conferences; but I want him to know about these things because in the district I have the honour to represent many people are concerned about them.
I have two other points, Mr. Chairman, with respect to aids to navigation. We are getting a great number of water craft coming up the Columbia river from as far south as Portland. As a matter of fact my son-inlaw had 22 United States craft tie up at his residence on the Saturday before last Labour day which had come from as far south as Portland along the Columbia river. I understand that a total of about 175 such craft came up this river last year. These people had just begun to realize where the Garden of Eden is situated and where there are opportunities for 300 miles of magnificent water transportation.
These people require navigation aids. Quite a bit has been done by the department in installing navigation aids between the international boundary and in the narrows between the upper and lower Arrow lakes and between Arrowhead and Revelstoke. I brought this matter to the attention of the former minister and his officials and, as I say, quite a lot has been done. But more could be done, particularly in the narrows between the upper and lower Arrow lakes. The department should make sure that signs are erected which people can understand. It is not good enough to put an oil can up on a tree and paint it red. A man comes along often knowing nothing about this route and he wonders what he should do when the sign says he is supposed to go so many chains, where he should turn and steer to a white cross. I think more of these markers should be erected; a map should be made available for people to purchase and upon it these markers should be indicated. This should also be done in connection with the Kootenay river and Kootenay lakes. People 28902-5-1711
Supply-Transport
should be able to understand what these signs mean. We have had a number of craft run aground between Arrowhead and Revelstoke because people simply did not understand what the signs meant. They got out of the channel and on to sand bars, and so on. I do urge that greater consideration be given to more adequate markers on the river and the issuance of maps showing what these markers mean.
The mines and technical surveys branch have promised for some time to publish a map of this sort. When inquiries have been made as to why this has not been done, the answer has been that they have been too busy on other things. Surely someone in the department could be given the job of marking these markers on the map and writing a code thereon as to what they mean. I do urge, Mr. Chairman, that this matter be brought to the attention of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys.
My final recommendation is this. The activities of the Department of Transport cover a very wide field and what they do affects a large number of people. To realize that this is right one has only to look at the row of handsome officials in the gallery this afternoon.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Order.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: My hon. friend from Winnipeg North Centre says order. I am not supposed to mention people whom I am not supposed to see; but I cannot help seeing them. There are a great many people in various departments that are concerned with these matters, who have the responsibility for the regulations covering the operation of small water craft, and so on. People are uninformed in many respects as to what the department is doing and the information that it available. I do suggest that the minister give consideration to having appropriate officials give an occasional talk to suitable organizations in various communities that are particularly concerned with the administration of the Department of Transport in so far as it is related directly to their daily lives. With those few remarks, Mr. Chairman, I conclude this spontaneous address.


Mr. Cashin:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a few remarks about the ferry service between the mainland of Canada and Newfoundland. At the present time there is one car ferry in service between Port aux Basques and North Sydney. It has been noted that during the summer months this ferry is not able to cope with the demand for service and this need will undoubtedly increase, now that the trans-Canada highway is being proceeded with at a more accentuated

Supply-Transport
pace in the province of Newfoundland. The suggestion has been made within the province that the real need is for additional service between North Sydney and Port aux Basques. While I do feel strongly that the present service is inadequate and this will become more apparent, as I have suggested, I do not think that ferry service between Port aux Basques and North Sydney should be confused with the need for an east coast ferry to the province of Newfoundland. This matter has been discussed and I understand that a great deal of work has been put into it. For this we must congratulate the former minister of transport and his department. I am sure the present minister is giving this matter his full attention, but I would like to say a few words about it.
The second ferry to Newfoundland will provide an alternate route and a service to the residents on the east coast of Newfoundland. I am informed that the great majority of the cars which now travel to the island do not proceed all the way to the east coast. Undoubtedly with a paved road across the island this will change somewhat. But I feel the addition of the east coast ferry will mean that a greater number of people will be attracted to travelling all the way across Newfoundland because they will be able to return by a cheaper and shorter route, the east coast ferry.
I am concerned, and I think this concern will grow when the road is completed, as I have suggested, that an east coast ferry in addition to the existing service between North Sydney and Port aux Basques will be inadequate. In fact it is inadequate at the present time. I would therefore make two suggestions for the consideration of the minister. One is that the possibility of purchasing a second hand ferry should be looked into. This ferry need not be of the icebreaker type because it would only be needed, primarily at least, in the summer or fall months to meet the demand which exists at that time of the year. I understand that these ferries can be purchased in a number of places in the world at a very nominal price.
There is some suggestion that this is not a popular move because these things should be built in Canada. If we are already undertaking a sizeable expenditure to provide a second ferry to Newfoundland, it would seem to be in order, to meet the growing need, that a second hand ferry be purchased to go into operation, I would suggest, between North Sydney and Argentia, and at a later date it could go into operation between North Sydney and Port aux Basques. One other suggestion I would like to make is this. It has been suggested to me as a possibility that

we could make use of, I believe they are called C-44's, the aircraft that is capable of carrying 10 to 12 cars. I think it would be a wise course if this suggestion were looked into as a possible means of transportation between Sydney and Stephenville airport on the west coast of Newfoundland. This type of service may reduce the overload on the existing ferry and may in some way be an attempt to meet the growing demand for service between the ports of Port aux Basques and Sydney.
I would say in closing, Mr. Chairman, that the people of Newfoundland are very anxious to have this matter of their ferry service taken care of. They are continually reminded of the fact that between the provinces of Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia there are five ferries, I believe, in operation and they do not understand why it is they have only one. Therefore, I hope that very shortly we shall have an announcement pertaining to the east coast ferries and that the minister will find time to look into the two matters I have suggested.


Mr. Clancy:: Mr. Chairman, on item 1 I am sure the minister is faced, and will be faced, with a great many applications from the railways to abandon certain sections of their lines. This is a complex problem and a very perplexing one which will not be the subject of any quick decisions. However, I have one or two matters I would like the minister to consider. When a railway gets permission to abandon a line, does the right of way revert to the crown? Do the mineral rights on the right of way also revert to the crown? All hon. members are reasonably familiar with the development of rail transportation in western Canada, and the government of the day gave large grants of land to encourage the railways to provide a service to the people and for the future. They gave both the surface rights and the mineral rights. I agree that 60 years ago those mineral rights did not appear to be valuable, but the surface rights were important. I feel that today when a railway receives permission to abandon a section of line providing a service for which they were paid, an adjustment should be made so that the mineral rights, or at least a percentage of them, will revert to the crown.


Mr. Sienson:: Mr. Chairman, in taking part in a discussion of the estimates of the Department of Transport I should like to discuss the Trent canal and its possibilities for increased tourist trade. In my constituency the main tourist attraction is the Trent canal system. This deep-water system consists of many locks linked by various rivers and narrows, as well as the locks and channels of the Trent canal. The canal lift lock at Peterborough

which lifts boats to a height of 65 feet, is the highest hydraulic lift lock in the world, and I was very glad to see that the minister has in his estimates $175,000 for the work on this lift lock. I should like to ask the minister to attempt to have the work started as soon as possible after the close of the season so as not to interrupt travel on the Trent next spring.
The Trent canal attracts the largest number of pleasure craft in Canada. In 1959 the lockage of the Trent canal was 61,935, the highest in the nation. This figure was more than three times the 20,510 recorded in 1954. The canal system was built over 50 years ago and is a compliment to the engineering of that era. The money which the Conservative government set aside to beautify and restore this system during the last parliament should not be pared in any way, because this system brings to Canada millions of tourist dollars each year. It has been said that 24 tourists daily equal a $100,000 industry. This should be very interesting to the new Minister of Industry. More than 450 resorts and camps cater to visitors in the Kawartha lakes area, and the permanent summer population of tourists and visitors is more than 100,000 people. Our summer visitors in the Peterborough area total many more than one million each year. This is why we feel we should not pare estimates for our canal systems. Canada has in the Trent a tremendous tourist attraction which is only now approaching its potential as a tourist dollar earner.
Now that I have spoken of the potential of the Trent as a tourist dollar earner I should like to point out the inadequacies of the methods employed on the Trent system. I refer particularly to the opening and closing of the locks. I do not think it is fair to these employees to subject them to the drudgery of opening locks in the same manner as they were opened over 40 years ago. There has been a start made to electrify them, but this should be speeded up. I understand the hon. member for Northumberland is opening a new lock at Fenelon Falls tomorrow.


George James McIlraith: I should like to be there.


Fred Frise Stenson: Perhaps we should all be there. I feel the system has been neglected too long, both from the standpoint of the people operating the locks and from the standpoint of the people operating the boats.
I also want to make reference to the low level bridges which are found on the Trent system. There are several of them in my constituency. Surely it is about time in this day and age that we eliminate these places where boats have to stop in order that bridges may be turned. These are things which hurt our tourist industry. Both boats and highway
Supply-Transport
traffic are held up while bridges are being turned. I know of two such places in my riding on busy highways, and I understand the Ontario department of highways has plans to correct this if they get support from the Department of Transport. Such things are very annoying to our tourists. I feel that we should get rid of these obstacles so that we can invite tourists from the United States, who are used to electrification of locks, to enjoy our canals. The prospect is that many more boatmen from the United States will use this water highway.
I should like to refer to the recommendations in volume 3 of the Glassco report, where they recommend a toll system to assist in the cost of operating our canals. I am afraid this will cost the Department of Transport more in supervision than they could realize from the rentals. An alternative to this problem, which I feel would help to give some revenue to these systems and to the tourist industry, is the tax that the Ontario government refunds on gasoline used for marine purposes. If this amount of money were put back into the upkeep of these canals for our tourists there would not be a need for tolls or wharf rentals. In Ontario for the year ending March 31, 1962, the government refunded to the boating public the sum of $610,000, and it was estimated that another $600,000 was not claimed. This amounts to $1,210,000. This money is realized from an 11 cents per gallon refund on gas used in motor boats. At the present time I have not the figures of refunds received by people in the province of Quebec or the other provinces across Canada. To bring these tax refunds into the federal system, it would mean an adjustment between the provincial and federal governments. We realize that the boating industry is growing every year. Lockage on the Trent system is increasing by 10 per cent every year. Along with this increase in the use of the Trent, the operation and maintenance costs of the system have increased. In addition to this there are costs of rebuilding and replacing the locks. This has been estimated over a ten-year period to be over $12 million.
In conclusion, may I say there are a few other areas of this waterway in which I should like to see some improvement. There should be sewage disposal tanks provided in appropriate areas so sewage could be pumped from boats. No sewage should be emptied from cruisers or houseboats into our canal systems.
Our locks should be open from early morning until sundown to service the public properly. Men working on the locks should not be asked to work seven days a week from eight in the morning until late at night. If there were a double shift, it would be a help

Supply-Transport
to the men operating the locks and give better service to the tourists. In closing, I should like to say that we should get on with the completion of this waterway in order to help balance our tourist trade with the United States.


Mr. Regan:: I am anxious to make a few comments with reference to transportation because questions of transportation are, indeed, the essence of the economic problems in the maritime provinces and, in particular, in my constituency of Halifax.
The present freight rates policy of this nation coats the martime arteries of transportation, interfering with the economic and healthy flow of goods through those arteries. As you know, Mr. Chairman, the Atlantic development board has already indicated it will investigate the effect of the St. Lawrence seaway both in the past and in the future upon the maritime economy. I hope the Minister of Transport will pay close attention to the results of this investigation because, if we in the maritimes are to be helped, the greatest thing that the Atlantic development board or the area development agency of the new Department of Industry or, indeed, any other branch of the government could do would be to use the transportation facilities which exist in this nation, and particularly the government-owned railway, so as to provide something closer to a postal stamp system of freight rates so that manufacturers in all parts of the country would have an equal opportunity to ship their goods elsewhere. This would be the best way of making the maritime region self-supporting and prosperous, along with the rest of Canada. If this were done we would find there would not be these large areas which lag so badly behind the rest of the nation in economic development, as do the Atlantic provinces and some other areas.
In the constituency of Halifax our largest industry, and the backbone of our economy, is the port of Halifax and the handling of the goods which historically go through our waterfront, both in the course of importation to Canada for use in the central Canadian market and in the course of export by the manufacturers of Ontario, Quebec, and the central region. The handling of these goods both coming and going provides employment on the waterfront of Halifax. Traditionally, Halifax, along with Saint John, New Brunswick, has been the major winter port of this country. But there is no rail or freight subsidy on goods imported or exported through maritime ports. These goods are carried at the normal freight rates of the railway. We have been placed in an increasingly disadvantageous position and have suffered economic hardship because of the
[Mr. Stenson.l
growing extent of subsidies to other means of transportation, particularly since the completion of the seaway. Throughout the length of the St. Lawrence we see a subsidy on navigation aids. Aids must be given to navigation from the time a ship enters the St. Lawrence river proper to the time it reaches Montreal and, of course, beyond that, on the seaway itself.
Another subsidy to transportation on the St. Lawrence river is in the form of dredging, which is done at federal expense. Another is the use of icebreakers, which has increasingly lengthened the St. Lawrence shipping season to the disadvantage of the maritimes. Another subsidy to transport on the St. Lawrence river is pilotage in the river proper, as distinct from pilotage in the harbours which are on the way. This type of expenditure is not needed outside harbours in the Atlantic region because pilotage is not necessary on the open sea. In addition, on the seaway itself we have artificially low tolls which do not return the amounts of money which have been invested in this great and forward looking water system.
As a result of all these circumstances, the port of Halifax is this summer suffering from loss of business. We have had in the Halifax area the quietest summer along the waterfront in many years. Each year has become a little worse. Even within the past month or two, shipping lines which carry goods to Africa have found there are competitors who are willing to go to the head of the seaway. I do hope that while he is waiting for the results of this over-all investigation by the Atlantic development board the minister will consider immediate measures to stop any further erosion of business from our port at the present time. Of course, every ship which changes its ports of call and abandons the port of Saint John or the port of Halifax makes the situation more acute because frequency of sailing is about the most important thing a port can offer when it goes looking for goods to be shipped. If a port cannot offer frequent sailings it cannot interest manufacturers, exporters or importers in using its facilities. Thus, when we lose certain ships or established lines there is a chain reaction which hurts us in other ways.
We heard the Minister of Trade and Commerce announce in this house two or three days ago that the government intended to spend $40 million in new or extra aid to underdeveloped countries by providing them with food, presumably flour and wheat. I would urge the government to consider channelling a large proportion of these additional exports through the maritime ports. In this way we would receive some measure of

immediate help. I know that recently there have been instances of shipments of grain and flour specifically destined for Poland having gone through the port of Vancouver, even though Vancouver was so busy that ships were waiting to be loaded. I hope that the Minister of Transport will continue to keep a close watch on this situation and do everything possible for the assistance of transportation in the maritime provinces because only when we have a comprehensive freight rates system, indeed something close to a postal stamp type of freight rates system, will it be possible for the maritimes to be prosperous again. In this regard I also want to say that the continued use of the port of New York both for the export of Canadian goods and the import of goods into Canada should be curtailed in some manner by the government for the greater economic benefit of Canadian ports.
To turn to one other subject very briefly, Mr. Chairman, there is in the Department of Transport estimates the usual deficit, although not a large one, for the ferry operating between Yarmouth and Bar Harbor which transports passengers, passenger cars and trucks. The service provided by the motor vessel Bluenose is of very great importance to the tourist industry in Nova Scotia, but I feel that at the present time it is inadequate and there is great need for a second ferry, particularly for the summer months, on the run from Bar Harbor to Yarmouth. The Bluenose has been successful on this run, where earlier attempts at a ferry service between New England and Nova Scotia resulted in astronomical losses. The present service operates between the closest two points, thus enabling the Bluenose to make a return run the same day. In the days of the service from Boston this was not possible, and I submit that if a second ferry is added at any time it should also operate with Bar Harbor as the United States terminal.
The recent announcement of a new national park in western Nova Scotia adds importance to the service of the motor vessel Bluenose because it will be a further impetus for tourists from the United States to come to that part of the province. In connection with the present operation of the service I should like to say that from my own very recent experience I do not feel that tourists and other passengers intending to travel on the boat receive the attention and courteous service at the Bar Harbor terminal in Maine that is necessary, if they are to have a good initial impression of Canada when they arrive in Nova Scotia. While this terminal may be operated by the American authorities, I do not think the average traveller fully realizes this, and it is very much to the advantage of this
Supply-Transport
country in helping to develop the tourist industry that we impress upon those connected with the terminal at Bar Harbor that people travelling to Nova Scotia should be treated with the utmost courtesy.
There are also some other flaws at that terminal. I am informed by people who made the trip during the past week that the motor vessel Bluenose sailed on two or three occasions at least from Bar Harbor, with less than her capacity of cars, even though there were tourists waiting in the area to travel on the boat who then had to wait until the next day. This inefficiency should certainly be remedied.
My final words, Mr. Chairman, are with reference to the Canadian Pacific Railway ferry service between Digby and Saint John. As hon. members know, the Princess Helene was recently retired from service and replaced by the former Princess of Nanaimo, now renamed the Princess of Acadia.


Harold Edward Winch: A good ship.


Gerald Augustine Regan: That may be. While I am sure that the Princess of Acadia has a very large capacity for passengers, those who live in the area say that she does not carry enough trucks. Again, this is a problem of transportation for western Nova Scotia in that we should be able to ship our fish and all our goods as easily as possible. If the Princess of Acadia cannot carry an adequate number of trucks, then she is not providing the necessary service. Indeed, the necessary service to afford efficient transportation will never be provided until we have a car ferry operating between Digby and Saint John. Only then will Nova Scotia have ferry service provided by the two railways rather than ferry service provided by one railway plus a service in the form of a loose liaison between the Dominion Atlantic Railway and the Canadian Pacific Railway through the use of the Princess of Acadia.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Chairman, I just want to say a word or two on a project which I am sure will be close to the heart of the minister, inasmuch as he is an Ottawa valley member and has always taken quite a personal interest in it. I am speaking of the Ottawa river seaway from Montreal to Georgian bay. I do not want to embarrass the minister at this time about canals because I know he already has a canal in Quebec, the Soulanges, which he is trying to get rid of, but with no bidders. However, I want to bring this project to his attention. He is familiar with many of the details and I am also quite sure he is aware that a year or two ago his department undertook a survey to determine the economic

Supply-Transport
possibilities of the Ottawa seaway. I know that the survey was undertaken but I do not know what stage the survey has reached. Perhaps the minister would like to inquire about this and report to me or to the committee any findings which his officials have made.
In that connection he may also recall that the Department of Public Works undertook a feasibility survey of the Ottawa river seaway from the engineering point of view. This survey was based exclusively on engineering data already in the possession of the department and consisting primarily of a report made in 1908 following a very extensive survey instituted by the government of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, which took four years. This was followed by another survey in 1927.
As a result of the survey made last year I believe the engineers of the Department of Public Works were in agreement that from an engineering point of view there was no insurmountable obstable to the canal being built. This more or less placed the onus upon the Department of Transport, which is interested in the economic aspects of the project.
There are various steps, of course, by which this project may be achieved. One of the first steps would be to make the city of Ottawa accessible to sea navigation by making the city of Ottawa or some port in the neighbourhood on the Quebec side into a seaport accessible to ocean going traffic. I think this is a practical project. Although no official report has been issued as far as I know, the information I was able to obtain from the Department of Public Works indicated that it would cost about $100 million to achieve this first stage of the over-all project which would open the whole of the Ottawa river and lake Nipissing and the French river to ocean navigation, right through to Georgian bay.
Now, Mr. Chairman, the minister in his investigation of the matter to determine the economic benefits to be derived from the projects might also take a look at another proposal which, in my view, is closely linked to the Ottawa river seaway. I refer to a proposal known as the Grand canal which is being promoted in a very vigorous manner by an engineer from Sudbury, Mr. James Kierans. This project, if implemented, would provide a means of paying for part of the cost of the canal. The plan would be to divert waters that are now flowing uselessly into James bay into the Ottawa river system and eventually having that flow of water reach the great lakes to replenish the low level of water that exists in the great lakes now. This need has reached crisis proportions, especially for cities such as Chicago on the south side of the great lakes.
[Mr. Martineau.l
As the minister knows, there has been extensive lobbying in the United States to permit the lowering of levels in the great lakes. So far, the pressure in that direction has been resisted. At one stage I believe the then president of the United States, Mr. Eisenhower, vetoed a project which would have enabled the cities in the United States along the great lakes to take a greater supply of water, thereby lowering the general level of the great lakes. The current project envisages the flow of great masses of water down the French river and into the great lakes, and also it envisages the possible sale of water. Water is a raw material, and it is a much needed raw material that is becoming in shorter supply as the years go by and as the need for it increases.
This project I believe will bear investigation by the officials of the department, especially in the light of the possibility of opening the Ottawa river to deep sea navigation. This project, of course, has been mooted with varying degrees of intensity throughout the years since confederation. I believe the time is fast approaching in this country when we should make greater utilization of the very important natural resources which we have for water transportation. Water transportation is more and more being exploited in the United States, and particularly in Europe. Certainly if there existed in Europe any waterway with potentialities for navigation, such as the Ottawa system, it would have been utilized long ago. I know the conditions are not the same. I know the minister will say it is going to be a costly project. This is true, but it is a project that must be visualized not only for tomorrow or the next ten years, but perhaps for the next 50 or 60 years.
One result of the construction of this project, as the minister is aware, would be the opening of great sectors of northern Ontario and northern Quebec to intensive industrial development. If a seaway of the proportions of the St. Lawrence seaway is not possible at this time, then at least some start should be made on opening the Ottawa to barge traffic. There is quite an amount of bulk traffic that could be carried by that means. I hope, therefore, the minister will ask his officials to intensify and accelerate the economic survey in order to determine what steps in the project could be implemented now, what possibilities there are for water traffic, what possibilities there are for the development of new hydroelectric power from the project and also what possibilities there are of making a deal with the United States for the purchase of new fresh water supplies.

I believe this summarizes my thoughts on the subject. I know the minister has a personal interest in this matter, and I feel he will be doing something along these lines.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, the next time the minister has an opportunity to answer points that have been raised, I hope he will make a statement on two matters about which I should like to remind him. First, I wish he would bring us up to date on the T.C.A. maintenance and overhaul base at Winnipeg. As the minister knows, all of us from Winnipeg, indeed all of us from Manitoba, who were present when the Manitoba delegation appeared before the government on June 18, were delighted with the statement made by the Prime Minister. We were led to have hope that the employment provided at the T.C.A. base in Winnipeg would be retained there. There have been indications, even since then, that something is being done about this matter. Perhaps the minister could bring us up to date. Perhaps he could tell us how the firm of R. Dixon Speas and Associates is getting along with the inquiry it is making. Perhaps he could tell us what the situation is with regard to this matter, which is of great importance to the employees who are affected and, we feel, of importance to the aviation picture in Canada.
The other matter about which I should like to hear from the minister is related to the pension situation of Canadian National employees who are already retired. As the minister knows, this is a subject which has often been raised in this house over the past years. On April 13, 1962, the then prime minister announced in the house changes that had been made in the pension plan of Canadian National Railways, improving the pension position of those who were still employees. Although the announcement was made on April 13, the effective date of those changes was April 1, 1962. At that time the former prime minister was asked what was being done for those who were retired prior to April 1 of that year. Of course, the answer was that that was another matter that had to be looked into upon another occasion.
I make two points in connection with the announcement made by the former prime minister on that occasion. The first is that it is always contended, and I agree, quite properly, that this is a matter that is in the hands of the management of Canadian National Railways. I also have in mind the role of pension committee. Nevertheless, when the former prime minister made his announcement in 1962, he indicated a decision had been arrived at as a result of discussions between the Canadian National Railways and the government. Since the government came 28902-5-172
Supply-Transport
into the picture on that occasion, it seems to me that it might well come into the picture with regard to the matter of improving the pensions of those already retired.
The other point I wish to make arising out of what was said on April 13, 1962, is that an improvement was then made with respect to service that had been given many years before. We are frequently told when we raise questions about the pension position of people who are about to retire, or are already retired, that there is a contractual element in all of this and that we must not hope to have it changed. But certainly on that occasion the contractual element, so far as early years of service was concerned, was changed, and I think that is something that is not unreasonable for us to request for employees previously pensioned.
As a matter of fact in 1959 this was done with respect to retired employees of the federal civil service. We have often been told when we plead for an improvement in the position of retired government employees that this would interfere with the contractual arrangement, but at least the former government did find a way in 1959 to improve the position of civil servants already retired. This was done through the Public Service Pension Adjustment Act of 1959.
Because something was done to improve the position of Canadian National employees still to retire, with respect to their earlier service, and because something was done by the federal government to improve the position of civil servants already retired, I think it is not unreasonable for us to continue asking for an improvement in the pension position of Canadian National Railways employees already retired.
As the minister knows, because it was his parliamentary secretary who placed the facts on record in Hansard, there is quite a bit of information on the present situation to be found in Hansard of June 3, 1963, at pages 542 and 543. That information was given in answer to perennial questions of mine regarding the amounts of pension being drawn by retired C.N.R. employees.
If I may summarize the figures from the pages I have just noted, there would seem be a total of 23,833 persons drawing Canadian National Railways pensions. These vary from very small amounts to larger sums, in fact sums of $200 a month and over; but I emphasize the fact that of this grand total there are 377 persons who are drawing pensions of less than $25 a month. There are also 2,559 whose pensions are just $25 a month.
There is a footnote on pages 542 and 543 which explains why some of these people are drawing such small pensions, but even the foonote does not explain away the fact that

Supply-Transport
pensions of these amounts are very low. If one looks further at these tables and does a little simple arithmetic, he discovers that out of the 23,833 pensioners 7,148, or 30 per cent of them, are drawing pensions of less than $50 a month. I offer one further statistic. Out of that same total of 23,833 some 12,357, or 56 per cent, are drawing pensions of less than $100 a month from the Canadian National.
I submit that in this day when we are moving into an acceptance of the view-and I am very happy to see it-that the pensions of people who have worked should be pensions that provide adequate retirement, these amounts being drawn by people who are already retired should not be left that way. In passing may I say that I hope the discussions that are taking place today not far from this building will not interfere with certain plans to provide adequate retirement pensions.
However, I must insist that it is not good enough just to improve the pension plans of those still working. It is not good enough to just say that people who will retire 10 or 15 years from now will do pretty well. This is no consolation to those already retired who through their efforts have brought the Canadian National Railways, our economy and our country to the position that now obtains.
I urge the minister not to give the stock answer, that this is something to be left to the Canadian National Railways. The former government met the management and came up with an improved pension plan. It also did something for retired civil servants, and I shall have something more to say about retired civil servants when we come to the item covering them.
At this time we are talking to the head of the Department of Transport and I urge that he bring up in cabinet the whole question of what might be done to augment the pensions of these retired C.N.R. employees, and particularly of those in the lower and middle brackets.
I am interested in many aspects of the work in the minister's department, but on this occasion I thought I would just ask for a statement on these two important subjects, the question of retaining the T.C.A. maintenance and overhaul base at Winnipeg, and improving the pensions of C.N.R. employees already retired.


Mr. Greene:: With respect to the closing of railway lines, some have been closed in my constituency and at present there are two stations in process of being closed. The closing down of one of these will cause great inconvenience to the local citizens, who will have to travel some 15 miles to the nearest station. I am referring specifically to the

station at Douglas, which is actually located in North Renfrew but is very close to the borders of my constituency. If this station is closed the citizens will have to travel some 15 miles to Eganville, and this will be a great inconvenience.
I appreciate that railroads have to be put in a more economic condition than they are in at present, but I suggest it is not purely and solely a question of balance sheet economics. Those of us who have appeared before the board of transport commissioners when the closing of stations or lines was contemplated, have seen that the yardstick is apparently the balance sheet, how many dollars can we save, the question of present use, public convenience and necessity, but there are other considerations which must be taken into account at the policy making level, the cabinet level. These questions concern the future growth and future need of areas for railway service.
One thing that appears to be happening, which is not in the best interests of the country at large, is that this closing of stations and lines, as I understand it, is apparently only one aspect of the recommendations made by the MacPherson commission, and I suggest that those recommendations, if they are to be implemented, should either be implemented in toto or generally revised.
In that connection I would point out that in this session of parliament there has been demonstrated on this side of the house the fact that we are committed to short range and long range planning, and that we intend to see to it that the country develops along some planned scheme and not helter-skelter, as has been the case in the past. This being so, I suggest the question of railways should be treated in the same way.
We should not implement one small facet of the MacPherson report, namely the closing of stations or lines for economic reasons, unless we have a broad, new, comprehensive and planned railway policy which will include the social ramifications of the closing of these lines and stations. In other words, I do not think it can be purely a matter of dollars and cents and the immediate return or reward to the railways, as we are now considering it. In particular in the west end of my riding I have a situation, Mr. Chairman. This part of the country, the area around Barrys Bay, Killaloe and Brudenell used to be a very profitable and prosperous lumbering area. There was a day when this created employment and prosperity for that area, and now to a very large degree the forest resources have been depleted for many years and no secondary industry has come in by virtue of distance from markets, and the fact that there is no trained labour pool. Industry is not going to come into these areas

unless some encouragement is provided. I think such plans as the economic council, the Department of Industry and the new tax concessions may provide that type of incentive. But at the same time I do not think we should forget the transport aspect in this regard; that in these areas even roads are inadequate.
Surely we cannot hope to have secondary industries coming into these areas in the future unless there is adequate transportation for them both by road and by rail, and adequate service by way of stations situated in localities which will best serve the communities. Even though today it might be more economic for the railways to close these stations, I think we should look at the long term and the planning aspect and see whether, if we intend these areas to survive and develop economically in the future, we should not preserve the railways where they are needed for that future growth. 1 would remind the committee, Mr. Chairman, that at the time these charters were granted to the railways they were given monopolies and they made very large profits in some of these areas, particularly in areas such as the west end of my riding. When the lumbering industry was at its peak the railways were very happy to have those monopolies and to make these very large profits in those areas.
Such being the case, I do not think we should look only at last year's balance sheet. We should see whether those railways have made profits in past years, and if so, surely it is not asking too much to have them put back something from those profits they made in past years into these areas for future development and to encourage their future growth and industrialization. In these areas even some slight factor might make the difference between obtaining or not obtaining industry. Goodness only knows, there is little enough incentive for secondary industry to come into areas such as the west end of my riding. Hydro rates are higher than those in the metropolitan areas. If we take away this last resource of rail transportation and rail service we are in effect abandoning these areas in so far as future economic growth is concerned.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to say one word in respect of the Ottawa river, which is also in my constituency. It bounds my constituency and that of my hon. friend from Pontiac-Temiscamingue. There we have a community of interest.


An hon. Member:: And Carleton.


John James Greene: The river does bound Carleton, but Carleton is my neighbour to the east. I was very interested to hear the remarks of the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue 28902-5-172a
Supp ly-Transport
in this regard and 1 certainly associate myself with those remarks. I will be glad to provide any humble support that I can in respect of the request he made. Even before we reach the, I think very lofty and proper goal that he has as an end, I would suggest it would be in order, and should be done in the immediate future, in this area for the Department of Transport to embark upon a plan for building more wharves and loading devices along that river. There was a day when the Ottawa river was purely and simply a vehicle for the lumbering people to carry their logs to market. I think if one were to total up economically the value of the Ottawa river today, it would be found to be far more valuable as a tourist asset, as a summer resort asset than it is even to the lumbering industry. I suggest this has been accomplished with but little help from any arm of government; that by virtue of its natural attributes the area has developed as a tourist resort. But I think at this time help is needed to develop it even further. I remind the committee that this is an area of low employment. If we are to develop this area even further as a tourist resort, I suggest that the Department of Transport would contribute something very valuable in doing the following things. These can be done more immediately, possibly, than the long term plan which has been mentioned.
We could immediately build more wharves and loading platforms in this area. I think this would be extremely important to the growth of tourism. We should have a method whereby boats can be immediately transported over the dams and rapids. I think there are methods by which this can be done economically. I am instructed that it could be done very economically with the installation of a narrow gauge rail, so that boats could be transported across the hydro dams and so that tourists might travel, without the necessity of great expenditures in pleasure craft all the way from the St. Lawrence river to lake Temiscamingue. This could be done without the expenditure of a great deal of money. The first thing would be more wharves and more loading platforms for boats. The second thing would be a method of transporting boats across the present hydro dams so that a vast area which is today of only limited access to tourists and the boating public could be opened up, and a new era of tourism could loom in the future for the Ottawa valley. I think this could be done, as I have said, without spending a great deal of money and at the same time it would be a very facile and ready way of creating immediate employment which is now so badly needed in the area.

Supply-Transport
In the west end of my riding the areas of Combermere and Barrys Bay are a potential and undeveloped tourist paradise. A great deal could be done by the Department of Transport in building more wharves, more loading devices for boats, more locks so that one could travel from one lake to another. I think this would attract a great deal more United States tourist money in that area, which we need so very badly in order, among other things, to help us with our international balance of payments. This could be done without embarking upon any great program of expenditure. There is already on the books a plan for the building of a dam at Galeairy lake, Whitney. In spite of my efforts to that end to date, these plans have not been brought to fruition. I think these things should be hurried. If we are to be progressive, if we are to provide employment, this is the kind of thing we should do, and at the same time we would be developing a very important industry and a new area which has not to date been sufficiently opened to tourism.
One other aspect of the matter I should like to bring to the attention of the minister is this. I again go back to the question of the Ottawa river and the fact that its chief economic use is now as a tourist resort. Over the years the logs have come down this river in order to reach their ultimate destination, and many of these logs have sunk to the bottom of the river and today are sticking up all over the place, embedded in the bottom, some for hundreds of years. They create a very serious menace to the boating public. There have been serious accidents and it may be that some day there will be a fatal accident if these things are not looked after.
Here, I suggest, is where the Department of Transport could play a very valuable and useful part in opening up this area to more attractive tourism. It would create a new and interesting attraction to the tourist industry in this particular area where the great opening of the Ottawa river is, at Chats lake with Norway Bay on the Quebec side and Sand Point, Braeside and Arnprior on the Ontario side. If the river at this point could be cleaned up and the deadheads taken up from the bottom, this would improve the situation. The Department of Transport is in charge of navigable streams, and although this is not an easy job it would create employment for many people for a considerable period of time. It would also remove a hazard in the river and achieve the economic objective of creating a new and attractive tourist resort. I think this would be in the interests of the country as a whole, and the people of that area in particular.

(Translation):


Mr. Gauthier:: Mr. Chairman, at this stage of the debate on the estimates of the Department of Transport, I should like to draw the minister's attention on two matters which are of particular interest to my constituency: air lines and the Canadian National Railways.
As far as air lines are concerned, we do not seem to mean much today, because even if for the past few years we have had a magnificent landing strip located, to be more exact, on the limits of the town of Roberval, we have not yet succeeded in obtaining a regular service.
The minister will recognize that if the previous government had found it advisable to provide the necessary grants for the construction of that landing strip, it is because its need had been established for a long time. Then why is it practically deserted today, since it only accommodates the flow of tourists who, each year, invade the lake St. John area to head for our lakes and streams which, for fishing, are known as the best to be found in the province of Quebec.
This airport is an important asset for our tourist trade but in order to make our tourist service complete, we must think necessarily of an airport located within Dolbeau itself, because at the present time, in our opinion, the Roberval airport is quite inadequate by itself to meet the demand of the U.S. visitors who pour into our district. That is why we are asking the minister to investigate the situation.
I made a survey of my own in order to find out why the regular air transport companies did not use the Roberval airport and I beg of the minister to lend me his valuable assistance in order to settle this problem because it is unthinkable that such a deficiency should be allowed to continue. To begin with, I do not understand why the present service between Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec city up to Seven Islands through Bagotville should not also include on its route, the Roberval airport.
In fact, the people of Roberval and vicinity are always reluctant to go to an airport located four counties away in order to catch a plane when it would be so easy to authorize the scheduled flight to make a stop-over in Roberval. I ask you a question, Mr. Minister, and the people of Lake St. John are anxious to receive an answer. We are not begging, we are merely asking a very logical thing. I hope that you will not forget to take this

request into consideration when allotting your estimates.
I know that some people will object that such a service would be uneconomic, without even trying to support their allegation. Moreover, certain administrators can only give one answer: not profitable. It is much simpler than to make some effort to provide an adequate service in every area. The minister is convinced, I am sure, that an efficient service is essential to transportation. Every effort should be made to achieve that aim.
Mr. Chairman, as far as the C.N.R. is concerned, I inquired last year about having repairs made to our railway tracks and the only answer I got was an acknowledgment. Public bodies have also taken some steps in that connection, and I have here the last letter from the chamber of commerce of my county, of which I sent a copy to the department.
It was said, among other things:
We, of the Roberval chamber of commerce, propose, as part of our next year's activity, firmly to approach the board of transport commissioners finally to settle the renovation of our national railways line, Quebec via Dolbeau and Chicoutimi. We are already working on a well-informed brief which we will, in due time, transmit to you in order to support and defend that most important cause in our district. Among permanent projects, we do not believe that there are any more important projects than that one to give work to our unemployed on a permanent basis, at least for a few years to come.
I received such letters, sir, from nearly every town and city asking me to exert some pressure on the C.N.R. in order to have our lines improved.
Today, I see that your government is broadminded enough to understand our needs. You may be assured, sir, that the whole district will be happy to know of your effort to further the use of railways as means of transportation.
It may be said today that the railways are having fewer customers. But there is a reason for it. It is probably due-and I do not know whether you have already wondered about it-to the fact that the real object of a railway company has been forgotten, which is to give adequate service. It is all very well to build skyscrapers, to pour the taxpayers' money into terminal buildings in the larger centres, which buildings are getting the more vast and splendid as our local stations disappear. But I think that some
Supply-Transport
mistake was made in this respect, in that the money has been all invested in those grand buildings while the main thing was forgotten, that is to improve the tracks.
I am of the opinion that if stations had been built for the railroad and not the railroad for the stations, the C.N.R. would not have to regret a loss of patronage.
If you want to be convinced of my allegations, you need only to come to my riding, not in the luxurious car of the president of the C.N.R., but in the ramshackle car used by private members of parliament. I am convinced that when you arrive at Dolbeau, you will say, like 50 per cent of railway patrons: I will not be caught at it again. I wish to draw the minister's attention to this: they should put more emphasis on service, as service means improvement of the railway.
Even if railway officials have plush offices in skyscrapers, if they force patrons to travel in 30-year old cars, they will always have to face the same problem.
I have mentioned to you those two important points, sir, and I am sure that you will take my remarks into consideration.
(Text):


Mr. Mather:: I have one brief question I should like to direct to the minister. I wonder if when he replies to the various questions which have been directed to him during the afternoon he would answer this one. Can he give us any fresh information or encouraging word as to progress in the construction of that great project, the Vancouver international airport?


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I have a few brief remarks to make on a subject which, according to the papers at least, is very close to the minister's heart, namely the work of the research and rescue organization on the great lakes. My own interest in the subject has existed for a good many years. In 1954, I brought this question before the house in a motion and later on, in 1956, the minister of transport of that day, Mr. Marler, took a considerable interest in the matter and was responsible for drawing up a number of regulations concerning the use of small boats. Later still, the minister of transport who succeeded him took a similar interest in the subject and extended the search and rescue organization on the great lakes. I believe one or two ships are under construction and that one of them is already in service.
Such measures are obviously necessary because in the last ten years the number of small boats on the great lakes has, I suppose, quadrupled. I know that as many as 1,600

Supply-Transport
small boats go out on lake Erie from one little port, Turkey Point, when the bass fishing opens. Every week we read the accident toll on the water during the week end, and the loss of life through drowning and accidents involving small boats has begun to reach a scale we associate with the highways. I know the minister is interested in this subject. I have read in the papers reports of what he is doing and I hope he continues on this course. Many newspapers have carried editorials on this subject lately, requesting more action. We all know that everything cannot be done at once but as long as we can continue to make steady progress in this field it will be to the advantage of all the people of this country. Only yesterday I read an editorial on the subject in the London Free Press. Articles on the subject frequently appear in the Toronto Globe and Mail as well as in other papers. There are many organizations which help look after research and rescue work on the great lakes. Apart from the Department of Transport ships there are the Ontario provincial police, the R.C.M.P., volunteers from R.C.A.F. squadrons and so on. Various municipalities also have facilities for helping to rescue people who meet with accidents on the water.
For the sake of hon. members who are not familiar with the great lakes, let me say that these large bodies of fresh water can become exceedingly rough in a very short period of time. I do not wish to spend much more time discussing the situation because I have spoken about it repeatedly over the years and I know the minister has these things at heart. But there is a suggestion I should like to make to him. I have already mentioned that there are facilities to assist search and rescue work carried out by Department of Transport boats, R.C.A.F. teams, local authorities and the like. One of the problems seems to be that if anyone gets into trouble no one knows who to get in touch with. What is needed is a coordinator who has had some brief training so that he or she would know immediately whom to contact. Since most of these problems arise during the summer months I agree it would not be practicable for the department to take on a large extra staff of co-ordinators. What could be done might be to use senior university students. They could receive a brief course before taking up their work and act as co-ordinators, on the lakes, on other large inland waters and perhaps even on the seacoast as well. These would be third or fourth year students, and they would be engaged in the summer months to co-ordinate all the assorted search and rescue facilities I have mentioned. If anything happened, if someone got lost, or a boat overturned, it would be reported to the 
co-ordinator who in turn would immediately contact the proper facilities. Many drowning deaths arise because it takes too long to rescue the victims. What is really needed is a co-ordinator and I think such a person could be most helpful.


Harold Edward Winch: May I take just a few minutes in which to express the hope that the minister will give consideration to a matter which I believe requires his immediate attention. Though I do not know the exact figures, I presume millions of dollars are spent on air search and rescue. I know we all agree that a magnificent job has been done by those who take part in air search and rescue, and it will continue to be done. But is it not high time more effort was made, by law or by regulation, to place responsibility upon those who operate private planes and who are responsible for the majority of the air search and rescue work which takes place? It is my understanding that in British Columbia this year there have been seven crashes and that they involved a number of deaths. Yet in looking over the situation I am surprised to find that in a great many cases American private planes that come into Canada do not have to file a flight plan and do not have to advise anyone exactly how long they are going to be in Canada. So we have the situation of a private plane crossing our border, not filing a flight plan and not advising anyone as to where it is going or how long it is going to be in our country. The result is that in the event of an accident we are faced with a great expenditure.
I have also had it brought to my attention that far too many of those who pilot private planes in Canada do not file flight plans. In addition, although we have certain regulations with regard to safety equipment on private planes many of these planes do not have this equipment on board and there is practically no checking of private planes to see that they have the required equipment.
In view of the extensive cost to the government and therefore to the taxpayers of Canada of air search and rescue, surely we are not unjust in insisting on proper equipment in private planes, proper inspection of private planes and that when a plane leaves the ground somebody should be told where the pilot thinks he is going and when he anticipates arriving there.
I do not want to hold up the committee, but I feel that such a piece of equipment as the SARAH would be most useful. From all I have read it would appear that this very cheap electronic equipment is crashproof, and in the event of a crash it automatically sends out signals that can be picked up by those who are conducting the search. I

simply want to bring this matter to the attention of the committee because air crashes and fatalities are reaching substantial proportions and the higher they go the greater the cost to the government and the taxpayers. If these people will not do these things voluntarily, surely we have a right to ask that there should be regulations and laws to bring about conformity to common decency in the operation of planes in Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
45. Canadian coast guard-construction or acquisition of ships and equipment, $12,842,000.
Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, apparently I did not speak loudly enough, but I wish to say something on item 45. I just want to ask one question. I notice that it includes provision in whole or in part for the construction of two west coast weather ships. I should like to know whether one of these is to replace the existing weather ship or whether the result of this program when it is completed will be that we will have two additional weather ships. I believe this program was undertaken during the period when I was not a member of the house, and I should like to know what the net result will be when the program is completed.


George James McIlraith: The situation is that the two ships are required by the weather service to replace the frigates now doing the work. The contract for one of them is now before treasury board for approval. The other one will go to tender this fall.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Will this mean that when the program is completed there will be two weather ships on the west coast or three? Is one of them to replace the existing weather ship? That is my understanding. We have had one in operation for a number of years.


George James McIlraith: There is not one existing weather ship. There are three frigates doing the work now and when the two weather ships are completed they will rotate and replace the existing three frigates.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
65. Construction or acquisition of auto-ferry vessels and equipment as listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended upon individual listed projects $1,375,000.
Mr. Nowlan:: Mr. Chairman, I wonder
whether this item could stand because there is somebody who wants to ask some questions with respect to it. If it could stand it would be helpful.


The Deputy Chairman:: Agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.
Supply-Transport
65a. Construction or acquisition of auto-ferry vessels and equipment as listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended upon individual listed projects, $20,000.


Gordon Minto Churchill: This item should stand too.
Item stands.
120. Railway employees' provident fund-to supplement pension allowances under the Intercolonial and Prince Edward Island Employees' Provident Fund Act so as to make the minimum allowance payable in the calendar year 1963 $30 per month instead of $20 per month as fixed by the said act, $7,000.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, somewhere in these estimates we would like to have the minister reply to some of the points that were raised. This looks like the item where he might answer my question about the pensions of Canadian National Railway employees, unless he can tell me a better item under which he could give a better answer.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether I might make a suggestion. I suggest that any items on which members wish answers be allowed to stand and that we carry the items on which no one wants an answer. Then we would ask the committee to rise and take the others on another occasion.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That would be satisfactory to me, if the minister would state which of these three pension items he would like to stand for the purpose of dealing with the question I raised.


George James McIlraith: I think 120 is the correct item.
Item stands.
130. Air services administration, $1,995,600.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I should like some item to stand on which the minister can make a statement about the T.C.A. maintenance and overhaul base at Winnipeg.


George James McIlraith: I wonder whether I could give a short answer now. The hon. member may have noted the other day that in answer to a question on the orders of the day I said that I regretted to have to advise the house that the Dixon, Speas firm had advised T.C.A. that they would require until the early part of August to have their report ready for submission. So the matter will have to stand until we get that report. I am looking forward to getting it and I must say I am a little disappointed it has not been submitted earlier. That is the short answer.


Stanley Howard Knowles: We can take it in the meantime that there is no modification of the statement made by the Prime Minister on June 18 to the Manitoba delegation.

Supply-Transport


George James McIlraith: That is right.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
140. Control of civil aviation including the administration of the Aeronautics Act and regulations issued thereunder, $5,211,100.
(Translation):
Mr. Boulanger:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to direct a question to the minister. Is he considering the possibility of changing the name "Trans-Canada Air Lines" to "Air Canada" which would be bilingual? I might add we have heard about that for a certain time.
(Text):


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, I should like to answer this question in a more extended fashion than I will now, but perhaps I can abbreviate my reply by saying that this matter is receiving very active consideration at the present time. I am sympathetic to the quite numerous representations I have been getting on the subject. The way the matter stands at the moment is that T.C.A. is examining exactly what is required to be done within the organization itself. Then, of course, it is a matter for the T.C.A. directors to consider, and the government to decide, to make the necessary statutory changes. The complexity of making the change, particularly in the international field, will be easily seen. For safety reasons, one cannot have two names on the side of an aircraft. There must be one name only. 1 cannot say when the decision will be taken, but it is very much a live issue at the moment.
(Translation):


Prosper Boulanger: Perhaps I could suggest to the Minister of Transport to defer consideration of item 140 until next week, so that he can have the opportunity to give us either an affirmative answer or a more definite one.
(Text):


George James McIlraith: I should like to make a fuller reply.
Item stands.
145. Airports and other ground services, $22,532,100.


Mr. Patterson:: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if that item could stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.
155. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment with respect to national airports (as determined by the Minister of Transport) and related facilities; contributions towards construction done by local or private authorities with respect to such airports, amounts to be paid in settlement of claims for compensation by persons whose property is injuriously affected by the operation of a zoning regulation made under authority of paragraph (j) of subsection (1) of section 4 of the Aeronautics Act and authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current fiscal year not to exceed a total amount of $41,360,000, $38,477,000.


Mr. Leboe:: I wonder if item 155 could stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.
160. Contributions in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the governor in council, to assist in the establishment or improvement of local airports and related facilities, $163,700.


Edward Nasserden: I wonder if the minister could let us know what is required for assistance under item 160?


George James McIlraith: Perhaps we could let the item stand. It is a rather lengthy document.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.
165. Grants for the development of civil aviation, in the amounts detailed in the estimates, $360,000.


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: I wonder if this item could stand? I do not want to delay the committee but I should like the opportunity of asking some questions on this item.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.
200. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $2,300,500.


Robert Simpson: I wonder if item 200 could stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.
Air transport board-
205. Salaries and other expenses including the Canadian delegation to the international civil aviation organization, $622,400.


Mr.   Barnell@: May item 205 be allowed to stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.
Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada-
212. Amount to be credited to the railway grade crossing fund, in addition to the amount to be credited to the fund under the Railway Act in the current fiscal year; and, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to authorize an increase to $24,067,000 in the commitments (in addition to any commitments in respect of which amounts are appropriated under this or any other act) that may be made in the current and subsequent fiscal years, $100,000.


Edward Nasserden: May this stand, please?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.
C-Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada-
213a-To provide payments to companies subject to Order Number 96300, dated November 17, 1958, of the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada of an aggregate amount of $20,000,000 in respect of the period April 1, 1963, to March 31,

1964, to be paid in instalments at such times as may be determined by the said Board for the purpose of reimbursing the said companies for such diminution in their aggregate gross revenues during the said period as in the opinion of the said Board is attributable to such companies maintaining the rate level for freight traffic at an 8% increase instead of 17% as authorized by the said order; and to provide payments to the said companies of an aggregate amount in respect of the calendar year 1963 of $50,000,000 to be paid in instalments at such times and in accordance with such methods of allocation as may be determined by the said Board for the maintenance by such companies of the rates of freight traffic at the said reduced level, $70,000,000.


George James McIlraith: May this item stand?
Item stands.
National harbours board-225. Advances to national harbours board, subject to the provisions of section 29 of the National Harbours Board Act, to meet expenditures applicable to the calendar year 1963 on any or all of the following accounts:
Reconstruction and capital expenditures-
Halifax	 1,477,600
Saint John	 217,000
Quebec	 1,785,000
Prescott	 40,000
Churchill	 815,000
Generally-unforeseen and miscellaneous 200,000
4,534,600
Less-amount to be expended from replacement and other funds	 1,458,700


Robert Simpson: May item 225 be allowed to stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.


George James McIlraith: I do not want to delay members, but I should like to express very briefly my personal thanks for the co-operation and courtesy hon. members have shown today, having suffered from two or three days of intensive heat and humidity beyond that which most of us like to endure.
Progress reported.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Since we have had such wonderful co-operation today, I wonder if there would be unanimous consent to the taking of item 14, to establish the committee on drugs? I would be glad to move the motion on behalf of the hon. lady. I believe no one wishes to debate it, and it might be possible to get the committee organized next week.
Business of the House HEALTH AND WELFARE



ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMITTEE ON DRUGS AND CHEMICAL FOOD CONTAMINATION

John Whitney Pickersgill: That a special committee be appointed to consider and report on (a) the hazards of food contamination from insecticides, pesticides, and other noxious substances; and (b) the safety and cost of drugs; that the committee consist of 24 members to be designated later by the house; that the committee be empowered to send for persons, papers, records, and to report from time to time, and to print such papers and evidence from day to day as may be deemed advisable; and that the provisions of standing orders 66 and 67 be suspended in relation thereto.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Is it
the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Gordon Minto Churchill: Will the house leader, in view of the heat wave, give us a very short statement of the business for Monday only?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I will endeavour to be brief. According to an order issued last night by the house, on Monday we will take the various stages of the resolutions and bills respecting the remuneration and pensions of members of parliament. Then, if there is the consent of the house, we will take the same stages in the judges' measure. In any event, we will certainly take the resolution stage. I would not want to ask for third reading of either of those two bills because I believe they should stand over until the following day. We would like, if we could, to finish the excise tax in committee, and if the house were agreeable to have third reading.
Then there is a bill on which I believe there would be almost no debate. It is required under law that if a bridge is to be built over the St. Lawrence river there must be a statutory provision for it. The bill has passed the other house and has been before us for some time. I believe the work is being held up because we have not acted, and I would hope there might be a possibility of facilitating it without too much delay.
After that, if there should be any further time, we would start the committee stage on the economic council. I would prefer not to say anything about any day after Monday because the Prime Minister promised to report to us.


[Stage Direction]
It being thirteen minutes after six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Items Passed
[The following items were passed in committee
of supply]:
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT A-Department-
1. Departmental administration, $3,388,600.
Marine services-
5. Administration, including agencies $1,113,900. Aids to navigation-
10. Administration, operation and maintenance including fees for membership in the international organizations listed in the details of the estimates, $6,620,600.
15. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $5,320,000.
15a. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $600,000.
Canals-
20. Administration, operation and maintenance, $2,489,200
25. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, including payments to provinces or municipalities as contributions towards construction done by those bodies, $1,862,400.
25a. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $200,000.
St. Lawrence and Saguenay rivers ship channels- 30. Administration, operation and maintenance, $1,352,600.
30a. Administration, operation and maintenance, $136,800.
35. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $3,280,000.
Canadian coast guard-
40. Administration, operation and maintenance including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current fiscal year not to exceed a total amount of $22,851,300, $21,679,800.
40a. Administration, operation and maintenance, $498,400.
45. Construction or acquisition of ships and equipment, $12,842,000.
Marine regulations including pilotage and marine reporting services-
50. Administration, operation and maintenance including grants and contributions as detailed in the estimates and the payment of expenses, including excepted expenses, incurred in respect of Canadian distressed seamen as defined in section .306 of the Canada Shipping Act, $3,154,500.
55. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $286,500.
Railway and steamship services-
Newfoundland coastal services-
60. Construction or acquisition of passenger-cargo vessels and equipment and harbour facilities, $196,000.
65a. Construction or acquisition of auto-ferry vessels and equipment as listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended upon individual listed projects, $20,000.
Railway and steamship services-
70. Construction of dock and terminal facilities at Port aux Basques, Newfoundland, $82,200.
Newfoundland ferry service-
73. Federal government's share of the cost of containers for the transportation of freight and express, $212,000.
73a. Federal government's share of the cost of containers for the transportation of freight and
express-to extend the purposes of vote 73 of the main estimates, 1963-64, to include other appurtenances and the conversion of railway equipment, $63,000.
75. Construction of dock and terminal facilities at North Sydney, Nova Scotia and Argentia, Newfoundland, $190,200.
80. Payments to the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the company) upon applications approved by the Minister of Transport made by the company to the Minister of Finance, to be applied by the company in payment of the deficits, certified by the auditors of the company, arising in the operations in the calendar year 1963-Newfoundland ferry and terminals, $8,675,500.
85. Payments to the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the company) upon applications approved by the Minister of Transport made by the company to the Minister of Finance, to be applied by the company in payment of the deficits, certified by the auditors of the company, arising in the operations in the calendar year 1963-Prince Edward Island car ferry and terminals, $3,894,000.
Prince Edward Island car ferry and terminals- 90. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $1,147,200.
95. Yarmouth, Nova Scotia-Bar Harbor, Maine, U.S.A., ferry service-deficit, 1963, $241,000. Maritime Freight Rates Act-
100. Payment to the railway companies operating in the select territory designated by the act, of the difference occurring on account of the application of the act, between the tariff tolls and normal tolls under approved tariffs (estimated and certified to the Minister of Transport by the Canadian National Railway Company and approved by auditors of the said company respecting the eastern lines of the Canadian National Railways and in the case of the other railways by the board of transport commissioners for Canada) on all traffic moved during the calendar year 1963, $12,700,000.
105. Repairs and expenses in connection with the operation and maintenance of official railway cars under the jurisdiction of the department, $61,000.
107. Payment to the Canadian National Railway Company in the current and subsequent fiscal years of amounts in accordance with an agreement, entered into with the approval of the governor in council, providing for the termination of the collection of tolls on the Victoria jubilee bridge, Montreal, from such time and date and subject to such terms and conditions as may be specified therein: amount required for the current fiscal year, $3,453,000.
Pensions and other benefits-
115. Amount required to pay pensions at the rate of $300 per annum to former pilots: Raoul Lachance; Jules Lamarre; Wilhelm Langlois; Auguste Santerre, $1,200.
125. Supplemental pension allowances to former employees of Newfoundland railways, steamships and telecommunications services transferred to Canadian National Railways, $157,000.
AIR SERVICES Administrative branch-
130. Air services administration, $1,995,600.
135. Construction services administration, $3,970,600. Civil aviation branch-
150. Air traffic control, $8,596,100.
160a. Contributions in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the governor in council, to assist in the establishment or improvement of local airports and related facilities, $22,800.

170. Payments to the other governments or international agencies that are detailed in the estimates for the operation and maintenance of airports, air navigation and airways facilities, including authority to pay assessments in the amounts and in the currencies in which they are levied, notwithstanding that the total of such payments may exceed the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of December, 1962, which is, $238,000.
Telecommunications and electronics branch-
(Radio aids to air and marine navigation-
175. Administration, operation and maintenance, $20,745,600.
180. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $9,124,200.
(Radio Act and regulations-
185. Administration, operation and maintenance including Canada's share of the costs of the international radio, telegraph and telephone organizations listed in the details of the estimates, $3,009,300.
190. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $216,600.
192a. Gift of furnishings to the headquarters of the international telecommunication union at Geneva, Switzerland (revote), $10,000.
Meteorological branch-
195. Administration, operation and maintenance including Canada's assessment for membership in the world meteorological organization and $86,000 for grants in aid of meteorological research in Canadian universities, $18,310,200.
C__Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada-
210. Administration, operation and maintenance, $1,221,600.
D-Canadian maritime commission-
215. Administration, $196,135.
217. Degaussing Canadian government ships and Canadian-owned merchant ships, of 2,000 gross tons to 20,000 gross tons, of Canadian registry or of United Kingdom registry if subject to re-transfer to Canadian registry under special Intergovernmental arrangement, $165,000.
220. Steamship subventions for coastal services, as detailed in the estimates, $8,361,370.
220a. Steamship subventions for coastal services as detailed in the estimates, $189,228.
222. Capital subsidies for the construction of commercial and fishing vessels in accordance with regulations of the governor in council, $18,000,000.
222a. Capital subsidies for the construction of commercial and fishing vessels in accordance with regulations of the governor in council, $12,000,000.
E-National harbours board-
225a. Advances to national harbours board, subject to the provisions of section 29 of the National Harbours Board Act, to meet expenditures applicable to the calendar year 1963 on any or all of the following accounts:
He construct l on and capital expenditures
Saint John 			83,000
Quebec 			1,400,000
Churchill 			62,000
Supply-Items Passed
Less: Amount to be expended from replacement and other funds	 550,000 $995,000.
227a. Payment to the national harbours board to be applied in payment of the deficits (exclusive of interest on advances authorized by parliament and depreciation on capital structures) incurred in respect of the calendar year 1962 and expected to be incurred in the calendar year 1963 in the operation of the Champlain bridge, Montreal harbour, $92,000.
F-St. Lawrence seaway authority-
230. Operating deficit and capital requirements of canals and works entrusted to the St. Lawrence seaway authority with the approval of the governor in council, and to authorize, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act or any other act, the disbursement by the authority of revenues derived from the operation and management of such canals and works, $2,788,000.

[Stage Direction]
Transport-
General-
L63a. Advances to the Canadian National Railway Company, pending the enactment of the Canadian National Railways Financing and Guarantee Act, 1962-63, on such terms and conditions as the governor in council may approve, $26,000,000.
Canadian overseas telecommunication corporation- L65. Loans to the Canadian overseas telecommunication corporation in accordance with section 14 of the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation Act for additions and betterments to facilities $7,710,000.
L65a. Loans to the Canadian overseas telecommunication corporation in accordance with section 14 of the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation Act for additions and betterments to facilities, $3,284,145.
National harbours board-
L70. Advance to national harbours board, subject to the provisions of section 29 of the National Harbours Board Act, to meet expenditures applicable to the calendar year 1963 on any or all of the following accounts:
Reconstruction and capital expenditures-
Three Rivers	 $	845,000
Montreal	 8,116,500
Vancouver	 2,026,000
[Stage Direction]
Less-Amount to be expended from replacement and other funds ..	5,083,500 $5,904,000
L70a. Advances to national harbours board subject to the provisions of section 29 of the National Harbours Board Act, to meet expenditures applicable to the calendar year 1963 on the following account:
Reconstruction and capital expenditures-
Montreal	 $1,994,000
St. Lawrence seaway authority-
L75. Loans to the St. Lawrence seaway authority in such manner and subject to such terms and conditions as the governor in council may approve, $1,500,000.
1,545,000


[Stage Direction]
House of Representatives, Parliament House, CANBERRA, AUSTRALIA.
18th July, 1963.
Sir,
I have the honour to bring to the attention of your parliament a resolution agreed to by the House of Representatives of the parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia on 23rd May, 1963. The resolution is as follows:
That-
(1)	World-wide disarmament is now a condition of survival for all mankind;
(2)	Regional disarmament arrangements cannot give security while the danger of attack from other regions continues to exist;
(3)	No program of disarmament can be effective without proper safeguards;
(4)	Proper safeguards are impossible without inspection and verification on an international basis;
(5)	Therefore, agreements on the measures for the inspection and verification of the successive stages of general and complete disarmament are a necessary first step toward this objective;
(6)	Such agreements on international inspection and verification would afford evidence of good faith and willingness to implement positive measures for disarmament and would thus tend to reduce international tensions; and
(7)	Believing in these principles, this house desires Mr. Speaker to communicate this resolution to the parliaments of all members of the United Nations.
I have the honour to be, sir, your most obedient servant.
J. McLeay, Speaker.
The Speaker,
House of Commons,

[Stage Direction]
Monday, July 29, 1963