1964-03-23

Mr. Guy Marcoux (Quebec-Monlmorency) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-80, to amend the Senate and House of Commons Act (allowance to leaders).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Guy Marcoux: Mr. Speaker, Bill No. C-71 which was introduced last year, was the first Canadian piece of legislation to mention the political parties by name. My bill will simply include a definition of a political party and state the conditions a group must meet to be recognized as such.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



SOCIAL SECURITY


Mr. H. C. Harley (Hallon) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-81, to amend the Family Allowances Act and the Old Age Security Act (charitable gifts).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Harry Cruickshank Harley: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to allow the recipient of family allowance or old age security payments to donate this money back to the federal government for a specific purpose, such as an aid program or medical research, as outlined in detail in the bill.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS

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


Mr. MacEwan: Has an advertising agency been hired or will one be hired to direct a campaign regarding the introduction of a social insurance card and, if so (a) what is the name of the agency (b) what amount has been or will be paid to this agency?


Mr. MacEachen:: (a) and (b). Yes. The Mac-Laren Advertising Limited, Toronto, Ontario. The cost of this advertising campaign is estimated to be approximately $332,000, and whatever advertising may be required will be placed through that agency.



PENSIONS OF RETIRED CIVIL SERVANTS

Mr. Knowles: 1.	How many retired civil servants are receiving pensions of amounts within each of the following brackets: (a) less than $20 per month (b) $20 to $29.99 per month (c) $30 to $39.99 per month (d) $40 to $49.99 per month (e) $50 to $59.99 per month (f) $60 to $69.99 per month (g) $70 to $79.99 per month (h) $80 to $89.99 per month (i) $90 to $99.99 per month (j) $100 to $149.99 per month (k) $150 to $199.99 per month (1) $200 to $249.99 per month (m) $250 to $299.99 per month (n) $300 per month and over?
2.	How many widows of retired civil servants are receiving pensions of amounts within each of the brackets indicated in the above question?
3.	What is the number of retired federal civil servants and also the number of widows of retired federal civil servants presently residing in each province?


Mr. Benson:: 1. (a) 455; (b) 1,211; (c) 1,672;
(d)	1,591; (e) 1,543; (f) 1,413; (g) 1,299; (h) 1,245; (i) 1,162; (j) 5,246; (k) 3,649; Q) 2,432; (m) 1,229; (n) 1,547.
2.	(a) 1,544; (b) 1,634; (c) 1,573; (d) 1,362;
(e) 1,252; (f) 1,090; (g) 1,029; (h) 689; (i) 524; (j) 1,383; (k) 293; (1) 88; (m) 28; (n) 22.
3.
Retired
civil servants Widows
Newfoundland Prince Edward	255	106Island	144	81Nova Scotia	1,117	599New Brunswick	739	375Quebec	4,502	2,292Ontario	11,179	5,500Manitoba	1,304	529Saskatchewan	829	337Alberta	1,320	580British Columbia	3,701	1,796Territories	28	6Outside Canada	576	310



OPERATIONS OF CANADIAN NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS IN YUKON

Mr. Nielsen: 1.	What have been the total revenues gross and net of the operations of Canadian National Telecommunications in the Yukon for each of the years
1958,	1959, 1960, 1961 and 1962?
2.	What have been the total revenues gross and net of C.N.T. from the operation of Yukon Telephone Company Limited for each of the years 1958,
1959,	1960, 1961 and 1962?

Questions
3.	How many personnel are employed by C.N.T. in the Yukon, and what is the gross pay roll of such personnel?
4.	What is the total capital cost of plant and equipment in use by Canadian National Telecommunications in the Yukon?
5.	From which persons, firms or corporations have purchases of goods and services been made by C.N.T. in the Yukon since April 8, 1963?
6.	What is the nature and extent of such purchases, and the gross cost thereof, from each of such persons, firms or corporations in the Yukon?
7.	Were public tenders called for the purchase of such goods and services?
8.	If public tenders were called for such goods and services, what was the name of each of the successful bidders, and the amount of the successful bid?
9.	If public tenders were not called for such goods and services, for what reasons were they not called?
10.	In those cases where goods and services were supplied by persons, firms, or corporations in the Yukon without public tender call, what was the gross cost of such goods and/or services paid by C.N.T. to each such person, firm or corporation?


Mr. Pickersgill:: The management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
1.	Prior to 1962, the information requested was not maintained or required for purposes of the operation of the railway and would entail considerable time and clerical expense to produce. The figures for 1962, which were prepared for inclusion in the annual summary filed by the company pursuant to the Yukon Territory ordinances, are as follows: gross revenues, $3,486,025; net revenues, $1,920,994.
2.	As the Yukon Telephone Company was amalgamated with Canadian National Railway Company in December 1961, it did not exist as a separate corporate entity in 1962 and no separate accounting records were maintained. Accordingly, the requested information for that year is not readily available and would entail time and expense to produce. The revenues for the years 1958 to 1961, as recorded in annual summaries filed by the telephone company pursuant to the Yukon Territory ordinances, are as follows:
Year	Gross Revenues	Net Revenues1958	$ 146,960	$ 93,7441959	126,888	65,3341960	130,052	54,8461961	146,167	73,655One hundred and sixty	four employees
with a gross payroll of $76,341.99.
4.	Approximately $24,115,560.
5 to 10 incl. It is company policy to invite competitive tenders and award the contract to the lowest bidder who is able to meet all the specifications, and to buy wherever possible in the locality where the materials are to be used. It has not been the practice to divulge individual prices of contracts or materials purchased.



RECOMMENDATION RESPECTING DRUG PATENTS

Mr. Orlikow: Has the government reached any decision as to the desirability of implementing the recommendation of the report of the restrictive trade practices commission on the manufacture, distribution and sale of drugs that "patents with respect to drugs be abolished" since "in the opinion of the commission this is the only effective remedy to reduce the price of drugs in Canada"?


Mr. Favreau:: Careful consideration is being given to the recommendations of the restrictive trade practices commission and, as the Minister of National Health and Welfare informed the house last session, steps have already been taken to implement some of them. The recommendation concerning drug patents is still under study and I have been informed that further representations are to be made. If it is decided to amend the legislation, this decision will be made known in the proper way.



PRISON POPULATION, MARITIME PROVINCES

Mr. Coates: 1.	What was the estimated inmate population in federal penal institutions for the years 1960, 1961, 1962, and 1963, in the maritime provinces?
2.	How many paroles were granted from these institutions in the years 1960, 1961, 1962, and 1963?


Guy Favreau: There is only one federal penal institution in the maritime provinces. It is at Dorchester, New Brunswick.
1.	1960, 662; 1961, 713; 1962, 750; 1963, 720.
2.	1960, 146; 1961, 143; 1962, 97; 1963, 87.
^RECOGNITION OF NATIONALIST CHINA, MONGOLIA AND RED CHINA
Question No. 58*-Mr. Pigeon:
1.	On what date did the Canadian government recognize the government of nationalist China (Formosa) ?
2.	On what date did the Canadian government recognize the communist regime of Mongolia?
3.	Does the government intend to recognize the communist regime of China and, if so, when does it propose to do this and, if not, for what reasons?
4.	When will the government appoint an ambassador to Formosa?


Mr. Haidasz:: Mr. Speaker, the answer to that question is as follows:
1.	Canada recognized the government of nationalist China on December 20, 1928.
2.	We informed Mongolia of our diplomatic recognition on January 27, 1964, through a normal exchange of communications with the representative of that country in a capital where he is accredited. A similar procedure had been adopted by the previous government in the case of Albania in 1959.
3.	The government does not intend, at this time, to make any change in Canada's policy toward China. The question of recognizing the government of Peking involves various

factors which must be weighed carefully: Canada's role within international control commissions in Indochina and the stability of the situation in southeast Asia; then, the future of the inhabitants of Formosa; finally, the possible repercussions at the United Nations. Forecasting the future is now precluded by the rapid evolution of the situation.
Nevertheless, the government maintains that a country as important as continental China cannot and should not be isolated from the flows of international exchanges. That is why it shall continue the policy that has been followed these past few years, that is to increase as much as possible our trade and cultural exchanges with communist China.
4.	The government is not contemplating the appointment of an ambassador to Taipeh.



* EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


Mr. Pigeon: How many French Canadian officials of the Department of External Affairs have left that department since April 23, 1963?


Stanley Haidasz: Since April 23, 1963, five French Canadian diplomatic agents left the Department of External Affairs. One was named general commissioner for the Montreal world exhibition, another one was appointed assistant deputy minister in the Department of Transport. Four other French Canadian diplomatic agents obtained leave without pay, one having been appointed director of the national economic council, and two others having assumed duties in the World Exhibition Corporation. These transfers from the Department of External Affairs to the World Exhibition Corporation show the direct relations existing between these two bodies.
At the administrative level, 29 employees (archivists, stenographers, messengers, etc.) left the department during that period; 10 of them were transferred to other services of the federal government.
Altogether, of the 110 persons who left the department during that period, 38 were French Canadians, which represents a proportion higher than that of the previous year, but equal to that of 1961-62.


ADVERTISING REVENUE, STATION CJBC, TORONTO
Mr. Cowan: 1.	What has been the advertising revenue, month by month, secured by radio station CJBC, Toronto, since it became an independent station, separate from a network?
Questions
2.	What was the division of the advertising revenue in the month of January, 1964, between advertising in the French language and advertising in the English language?


Mr. Lamonlagne:: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows:
1.	It has not been customary to require the corporation to give information which could adversely affect it in the competitive business in which it is engaged.
2.	All revenue was from advertising in the English language.


CRIMINAL CODE PROVISION RESPECTING ALCOHOLIC IMPAIRMENT
Mr. Maiheson: Has consideration been given by the Department of Justice to (a) repealing section 224(4) of the Criminal Code (b) defining impairment under section 223 by specific blood alcohol level?


Guy Favreau: Representations for such repeal and definition have been received from the Canadian federation on alcohol problems and are being considered in the usual way in connection with the continuing Criminal Code amendment program but no conclusions have been reached in regard to proposing any amendments.


WAGES OF THIRD CLASS ENGINEERS, CAMP BORDEN AND EDENVALE
Mr. Addison: 1.	How is the rate of pay of civilian third class engineers determined at Camp Borden and Eden-vale?
2.	How does this rate of pay compare with private industry in that area?


Maurice Lamontagne: I am advised by the civil
service commission:
1.	The rates of pay for stationary engineers in the classified civil service, which includes the stationary engineers at Camp Borden and Edenvale, are established by the treasury board after consideration of recommendations made by the civil service commission, which recommendations are based on extensive information on rates paid by outside employers in the various regions of Canada. Such information is gathered by the pay research bureau once every two years under the current cyclical salary review program.
2.	The current rates were established with effect from October 1, 1962 as national rates applicable to classified stationary engineers in all locations in Canada. The normal grade for a stationary engineer holding a third class certificate would be stationary engineer grade
2.	The current salary range for this grade expressed in annual rates of pay is: $4,470, $4,650, $4,830, $5,010. The maximum rate is reached by way of regular annual increases. These rates compare favourably with those

Questions
for comparable employment in the area. The next review of salary rates for this class will be in October of this year.


C.N.R. DEBT FROM PRIVATE COMPANIES
Mr. Mather: What is the amount in dollars of that portion of the Canadian National Railways debt due to obligations incurred by defunct private railways which became part of the Canadian National system?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The management of Canadian National Railways advise that the subject matter of the question involves capital revision proposals which have been submitted to the government in relation to the financial structure of the system. As it involves complex technical calculations, the proposal, in order to be understood, must be reviewed in the whole and, therefore, it is not possible to give a brief answer.


BADDECK, N.S.  TENDERS FOR R.C.M.P. BUILDING
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria): When will tenders be called for a new R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at Baddeck, Nova Scotia?


Guy Favreau: Tenders will not be called for a new R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at Baddeck, Nova Scotia, for the next few years.


NORTH SYDNEY, N.S.  NEW R.C.M.P. QUARTERS
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria): What consideration is being given to the construction of new R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at North Sydney, Nova Scotia?


Guy Favreau: No consideration is being given to construction of new R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at North Sydney, Nova Scotia at the present time. Present quarters are police owned and are suitable for our present needs.


APPLICATIONS UNDER OLDER WORKER TRAINING PROGRAM
Mr. Korchinski: 1.	How many applications have been received to date from each of the provinces for assistance under the older worker employment and training incentive program?
2.	How many have been granted assistance under this program?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: 1. Up to February 29, 1964, the following number of applications had been received from employers:

Newfoundland	19
Prince Edward Island	9
Nova Scotia	59
New Brunswick	30
Quebec	542
Ontario	603
Manitoba	130
Saskatchewan	112
Alberta	204
British Columbia
(including Yukon Territory) 278
Total	1,986
2.	Nine hundred and thirty six workers had been hired up to February 29, 1964.


FISHERIES LOANS TO INLAND FISHERMEN
Mr. Danforth: 1.	How many loans under the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act have been made to inland water fishermen during the years 1958-63 and what was their total value?
2.	How many loans under the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act have been made to fishermen in the county of Kent, Ontario during the years 1958-63 and what was their total value?


Edgar John Benson: 1. Separate statistics on loans to inland fishermen are not available. However, during the fiscal years 1957-58 to 1962-63, 19 loans having a total value of $40,404 were made in the provinces of Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan.
2.	Statistics relating to the geographical distribution of these loans are broken down only by provinces. Accordingly, no figures are available to answer this part of the question.


TEULON, MAN.  TENDERS FOR R.C.M.P. QUARTERS
Mr. Stefanson: When will tenders be called for new R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at Teulon, Manitoba?


Guy Favreau: Tenders will be called for new R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at Teulon, Manitoba, within the next two months.


ARBORG, MAN.-R.C.M.P. DETACHMENT QUARTERS
Mr. Stefanson: 1.	Has land been purchased for R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at Arborg, Manitoba and, if so, from whom was land purchased and what was the cost?
2.	What type of detachment quarters do the plans call for and when will tenders be called?


Guy Favreau: 1. Land has been purchased for R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at Arborg, Manitoba from Mr. L. L. Cosford, Arborg, Manitoba at a price of $1,000.
2.	A standard R.C.M. Police detachment building will be constructed. Tenders will not be called until the fiscal year 1965-66 at the earliest.


FILLMORE, SASK.  R.C.M.P. DETACHMENT QUARTERS
Mr. Soulham: 1.	What consideration has been given to the construction of new R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at Fillmore, Saskatchewan?
2.	If new R.C.M.P. barracks are to be built, when does the government contemplate commencing this work?


Guy Favreau: 1. Consideration has been given in the long range construction program of the R.C.M. Police to the construction of new R.C.M.P. detachment quarters at Fillmore, Saskatchewan.
2.	Construction is not contemplated for at least five or six years.


OLDER WORKER EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
Mr. Ricard: 1.	How many employers have taken advantage of the older worker employment incentive program?
2.	How many older workers have been hired as a result of this program?
3.	How much money in the form of compensation payments has the government paid to employers?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: 1. 1,986 applications submitted, of which 1,333 had been approved up to February 29, 1964.
2.	936 up to February 29, 1964.
3.	$7,107.96 up to February 29, 1964.


*OLDER WORKERS EMPLOYED UNDER INCENTIVE PROGRAM, NOVA SCOTIA
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria): How many workers over the age of 45 years have been placed in employment (a) on the island of Cape Breton (b) in the rest of the province of Nova Scotia, as a result of the program by which their salaries are supplemented to a maximum of $75 monthly out of public funds?


Mr. Byrne:: (a) and (b). Figures are available by provinces only. Thirty one workers were hired under the program in the province of Nova Scotia up to February 29, 1964.


OLDER WORKERS EMPLOYED UNDER INCENTIVE PROGRAM, PICTOU CONSTITUENCY
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 176
Mr. MacEwan:: How many workers over the age of 45 have been placed in employment in the constituency of Pictou as a result of the program by which these salaries are supplemented to a maximum of $75 monthly out of public funds?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: No breakdown by constituencies available. Thirty one workers were hired under the program as at February 29, 1964, in the province of Nova Scotia.


NELSON RIVER, MAN.  NAVIGATION POSSIBILITIES
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 178
Mr. Stefanson:: Did the federal government conduct a survey of navigation possibilities on the Nelson river and, if so. what are the findings?
Questions


Mr. Deschaielets:: Yes, in connection with the power development studies being carried out jointly by the federal government and the provincial government of Manitoba. It was found that the provision of navigation facilities is not economically feasible at the present time.



MANITOBA


Mr. Stefanson: Has the government received a request from the University of Manitoba for financial assistance for its extension departments to carry out education among fishermen in fisheries techniques and cooperatives producing and selling and, if so, what action has been taken or is planned?
Answer: This government has not received such a request.



PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION, CHICOUTIMI COUNTY, QUE.

Mr. Cote (Chicoutimi): 1.	At what locations will post offices be built in the county of Chicoutimi during the year 1964?
2.	What other works will be undertaken or are planned for this year in that county?
3.	Has provision been made for the rebuilding of wharves at Chicoutimi and the construction or the completion of a retaining wall at Chicoutimi north? [Translation]
Answer: 1. Revenue post offices will be built at St. Fulgence and St. Leon de Chicoutimi in 1964.
2.	During the next fiscal year, the Department of Public Works proposes to carry out the following supplementary projects in the county of Chicoutimi: Bagotville, wharf repairs; L'Anse Saint Jean, wharf repairs; Saguenayville (Moulin river), protection wall; Ste. Rose du Nord, wharf repairs; Arvida federal building, repairs to windows and foundations; Kenogami federal building, interior painting.
3.	No item is charged to the national harbours board in the current budget concerning the reconstruction of wharves in the harbour of Chicoutimi. Completion of the retaining wall at Chicoutimi north in 1964 is not provided for.



FISHERMEN'S LOANS, MANITOBA

Mr. Stefanson: How many loans were made to fishermen In the province of Manitoba during the past five years under the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act, giving the number of loans for each year and total amount of loans?


Edgar John Benson: Two loans for a total of $4,320 were made under the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act to fishermen in the province of Manitoba during the fiscal year of 1959-60.

Questions
No loans under this act were made in the province of Manitoba during the fiscal years 1958-59, and 1960-61 to 1962-63.



MUNICIPAL LOAN APPLICATIONS, NOVA SCOTIA

Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
How many applications have been received and approved under the municipal loan fund to date in (a) the constituency of Cape Breton North and Victoria (b) the constituency of Invemess-Rich-mond (c) all of Cape Breton island, and (d) all of the province of Nova Scotia?


Edgar John Benson: No applications have been received and approved under the Municipal Development and Loan Act from the province of Nova Scotia, as of the date this question was asked.



ABOLITION OF DRUG PATENTS

Mr. Mather: Is consideration being given to implementing the recommendation of the restrictive trade practices commission to abolish drug patents when necessary to reduce the prices of drugs in Canada?


Guy Favreau: Careful consideration is being given to the recommendations of the restrictive trade practices commission and, as the Minister of National Health and Welfare informed the house last session, steps have already been taken to implement some of them. The recommendation concerning drug patents is still under study and I have been informed that further representations are to be made. If it is decided to amend the legislation, this decision will be made known in the proper way.



BONDING OF LAWYERS

Mr. Millar: Has the federal government considered taking steps to compel members of the legal profession to be properly bonded to ensure that clients' funds in their hands shall be protected against embezzlement?


Guy Favreau: No, because this is a provincial matter.



FARM IMPROVEMENT LOAN APPLICATIONS, MEGANTIC CONSTITUENCY

Mr. Langlois: 1.	With reference to the erection of farm buildings under the terms of the Farm Improvement Loans Act (a) how many applications were received from persons in the constituency of Megantic during 1962 (b) how many were rejected (c) how many were granted (d) what were the amounts in each case?
2.	With reference to the purchase of cattle under
the terms of the same act (a) how many applications were received from persons in the constituency of Megantic during 1962	(b) how many
were rejected (c) how many were granted (d) what were the amounts in each case?

3.	With reference to the purchase of farm implements under the terms of the same act (a) how many applications were received from persons in the constituency of Megantic during 1962 (b) how many were rejected (c) how many were granted (d) what were the amounts in each case?
4.	How many requests for loans for the purchase of farms were received from persons in the constituency of Megantic during the past two years and of these (a) how many were rejected (b) how many were granted (c) what was the total amount?
5.	What are the corresponding answers for the years 1955-60?


Maurice Lamontagne: 1, 2 and 3. Statistics available and tabled annually in the house, provide information of loans made by provinces but not by constituencies.
4.	In so far as the question relates to the Farm Credit Corporation, each loan made by the Farm Credit Corporation may encompass several purposes, including the purchase of farms. The Farm Credit Corporation advises that they do not maintain statistical records on a constituency basis, however, the constituency of Megantic is made up of the municipal county of Megantic and part of the municipal county of Frontenac, for which municipal counties the answer is as follows:
Fiscal Year		
1962-63	Megantic	FrontenacApplications	25	19Rejected	10	2Approvals	11	14Total amount of loans	$133,000	$149,200Note:	4 loans	3 loansunder review	under reviewat end	at endof fiscal year	of fiscal yearFiscal Year	1963-64	Megantic	FrontenacApplications	28	12Rejected	6	7Approvals	22	8Total amount of loans	$266,800	$82,100Note: 4 loans	3 loansstill under	underreview as of	review in
March 5,1964 1962-63 were approved in fiscal year 1963-64
Statistics available for the period preceding October 5, 1959 include only applications which resulted in a loan, consequently the figures do not take into consideration all applications received.

Questions
Frontenac
Megantic
Applications	Number Loans	Amount	Applications	Number Loans	Amount1955-56	1	1	$1,000	2	2	$4,8001956-57	1	1	$2,000	2	2	$5,0001957-58	2	2	$8,400	2	2	$7,9001958-59	2	2	$13,000	3	3	$10,0001959-60	*2	1	$4,000	3	3	$14,350*	1 rejected.



MCGILL UNIVERSITY


Mr. Orlikow: 1.	Has the government received a request for financial assistance for the McGill University project high altitude research program, better known as HARP and, if so (a) how much money was requested (b) is the government giving favourable consideration to this project?
2.	Is this project getting financial assistance from United States government agencies and, if so, how much assistance is this project getting from the U.S.?


Mr. Drury:: 1. Yes.
(a)	and (b) The Department of Defence Production has not been asked for a definite amount. However, an application for $43,000 has been received for the fiscal year 1964-65 by the national research council but this has not yet been considered by the honourable advisory council.
2. Yes, $500,000 in the form of contracts for experimental work.



* WATER FLUORIDATION

Mr. Slogan: 1.	What federal moneys have been expended by the Department of National Health and Welfare on research into the effects of water fluoridation, and the effects of topical application of fluorides to the teeth and what projects were supported?
2.	What general health benefits have been found from water fluoridation?
3.	What is the position of the federal government in regard to the fluoridation of communal water supplies?
4.	When is it expected that a clear statement of policy will emanate from the government regarding the favourable results of water fluoridation on the teeth?


Mr. Munro:: 1. Expenditures on projects submitted by the provinces and supported under the national health grants relating to research into the effects of water fluoridation and the effects of topical application of fluorides to the teeth total approximately $51,400.
So far as intramural research is concerned, in view of the fact that personnel of the Department of National Health and Welfare from three divisions and one directorate have been engaged intermittently over a period of 16 years on research into the effects of fluoridation, including topical fluorides, while at the
same time working on other programs, it is not possible to segregate expenditures on this project.
2. It is an established fact, from very extensive research, that the adjustment of the fluoride content of a water supply, whereby there is a concentration of one part fluoride to one million parts of water, brings about an average reduction of 60 per cent in the prev-valence of tooth decay to children consuming fluoridated water since birth. No ill effects have been noted.
This improvement in dental health of children, who will later be adults, ensures an improvement in general health, dental health being an integral part of total health.
3	and 4. The activities of the Department of National Health and Welfare in relation to fluoridation have from the beginning been limited to research, the publication of research findings and the provision of technical advice and information. No advice has been given for the specific purpose of influencing policy decisions.
However fluoridation of communal water supplies is of broad public interest and is considered to be of great importance in the total health picture of the population of Canada. As of November 1963 more than 3,800,000 people, or 20 per cent of the population, in 188 communities were consuming mechanically fluoridated water.
In addition to the 20 per cent of the Canadian population who are consuming water with fluoride content adjusted to one part per million, many thousands of people have been consuming for a lifetime, and even for generations, water which has been fluoridated from underground deposits of fluoride. No ill-effects have been observed.



BANKRUPTCY PETITIONS, ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 251
Mr. Lambert:: 1.	How many members of the armed services have filed petitions for bankruptcy in any province of Canada from January 1, 1962 to February 28, 1964?
2.	What is the distribution of such numbers by provinces and by calendar years?
3.	Does the filing of a petition for bankruptcy by a serviceman lead to his release as a matter of course, or are efforts made to assist such a person to rehabilitate himself financially?

Questions
4.	What counselling services are provided to armed service personnel with respect to personal financial matters?
Answer: 1 and 2. Although according to service regulations, an officer or man who files a petition for bankruptcy is required to report the fact, complete statistical records are not readily available.
3.	The filing of bankruptcy by an officer or man does not necessarily lead to release from his service as a matter of course. Each case is considered on its merits. Financial counselling is available to the individual concerned, including loans or grants from non-public funds depending on an assessment of all the circumstances involved.
4.	Extensive financial counselling services are provided to servicemen through the unit commander, welfare officers, officials of service benevolent funds, and lectures and articles in service publications relating to the management of personal financial affairs.



PENSIONS OF RETIRED MILITARY PERSONNEL

Mr. Mather: 1.	What is the range of monthly pensions drawn by retired military officers?
2.	What amounts are contributed by military officers toward such pensions?
3.	What is the monthly amount which retired military officers are allowed to earn in non-government positions?
Answer: 1. The maximum amount being drawn is $1,166.67 per month and the minimum is nil.
2.	Six per cent of pay as defined in section a(l) (h) of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act, up to a maximum of 35 years.
3.	There is no restriction.



APPOINTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, LISTOWEL, ONT.

Mr. Howe (Wellinglon-: Huron):
1.	Who has been appointed to fill the vacancy of employment officer in the national employment service at Listowel, competition No. 64-T-540?
2.	Who were the other candidates for this appointment?
3.	What marks were obtained by each candidate who wrote the examination?
4.	Was the statutory preference for veterans taken into consideration?


Maurice Lamontagne: 1. Mr. Bertram Courtney Paige, a veteran, and the first ranking candidate as a result of competition 64-T-540 to fill the vacancy of employment officer in the national employment service at Listowel, has been offered this position, and he has accepted. It is understood he is to report for duty on March 16.
2 and 3. Twenty one persons made application in competition 64-T-540. The names of the

successful candidates, namely, Messrs. Bertram Courtney Paige, Charles Kenneth Loc-head, and Ronald Stewart Higgins, will be published in the Canada Gazette in a week or two.
The commission holds in confidence the names and marks of unsuccessful candidates in civil service competitions, having regard for the right to privacy of the candidates and the possibility that publication of this information could prove to be not only embarrassing but also prejudicial to them.
4.	Yes.



*BANK OF CANADA-NEW CURRENCY ISSUED

Mr. Cote (Chicoutimi): 1.	Has the Bank of Canada actually issued new currency or new credits in addition to banking currency or new credits issued or created by chartered or commercial banks from the end of June, 1954 to July 3, 1963 and, if so (a) was this new currency issued on behalf of the federal government, of the provinces or of other bodies, and (b) what was the rate of interest?
2.	Has the Bank of Canada issued new capital or new credits since it began operations in 1935 and, if so, in what amounts?


Mr, Benson:: 1(a) As shown in its weekly published statements, the Bank of Canada's note circulation and its deposit liabilities at the dates in question were as follows:
June 30/54 July 3/63
Bank of Canada (millions of dollars) notes in circulation 1,553.5	2,200.1
Deposits at the Bank of Canada Government of
Canada	99.0	24.8
Provincial		
governments	-	-Chartered banks	624.4	768.0Other	41.4	40.6
(b) Nil.
2. The original capital of the Bank of Canada was $5,000,000 and was sold to the public. On September 11, 1936, an additional $5,100,000 was issued and sold to the government of Canada. On August 15, 1938, the $5,000,000 held by the public and $100,000 of the amount held by the government was redeemed, and since then the bank's capital has remained unchanged at $5,000,000.



DUTY ON IMPORTED AIRCRAFT

Mr. Barnett: 1.	Has a 15 per cent duty, effective April 1, 1964, been Imposed on single engine aircraft above 2,500 pounds, gross weight, imported into Canada?
2.	If not, has any announcement been made by the government in respect of a proposed change on the import duty on aircraft?
3.	If so, what was the nature of this announcement, and by whom was the announcement made?


Edgar John Benson: 1. No.

2.	No.
3.	Aircraft of types or sizes not made in Canada are free of duty under item 440m 1. Aircraft of types and sizes made in Canada are dutiable at a most favoured nation rate of 15 per cent under item 440m 2. I understand that an application has been submitted to the Department of National Revenue for a ruling that certain sizes of single engine aircraft are of a type or size made in Canada. If and when any changes are made in present rulings relating to types and sizes of aircraft made in Canada, they will be issued in the usual way by the Department of National Revenue.



C.M.H.C. LOANS, KITIMAT, B.C.

Mr. Howard: 1.	Has Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation established, since January 1, 1958 any restrictions regarding loans under the National Housing Act to people who live in Kitimat, B.C. and, if so, what is the extent of these restrictions, when were they implemented, to whom do they apply and what is the reason therefor?
2.	Can employees of the Aluminum Company of Canada at Kitimat, B.C. borrow money from or through Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation or pursuant to the National Housing Act and, if so, at what rates and upon what terms?
3.	Can people at Kitimat, B.C., other than employees of the Aluminum Company of Canada, borrow money from or through Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation or pursuant to the National Housing Act and, if so, at what rates and upon what terms?


Maurice Lamontagne: 1. The policy followed by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation in insuring loans made by approved lenders and in making direct loans in Kitimat has been the policy applicable to one-industry towns. In towns such as Kitimat, whose existence is dependent primarily on one industry, the corporation will insure loans or make direct loans only if the industry will provide some form of direct or indirect guarantee arrangement that will provide the corporation with some additional protection against the increased risk in such communities. This policy applies to employees of the industry and also to persons who are not employees of the industry. If a guarantee of some kind is not provided by the industry in the case of non-employees, then the loan to the individual is reduced. In Kitimat the appropriate minimum reduction was considered to be 10 per cent. Except for the foregoing, the terms and conditions are those of general application under the National Housing Act.
2.	Yes, as in 1 above.
3.	Yes, as in 1 above.
Questions



BANK OF CANADA SURPLUS

Mr. Ormislon: 1.	Does the Bank of Canada surrender its surplus annually to the Receiver General of Canada and, if so, to what use is such surplus put?
2.	In each of the years since its incorporaton, what surplus has the Bank of Canada surrendered to the Receiver General of Canada?


Edgar John Benson: 1. Yes, pursuant to the Bank of Canada Act, section 24(c). Section 24 reads as follows:
"24. The bank shall establish a rest fund and after making such provision as the board . thinks proper for bad and doubtful debts, depreciation in assets, pension funds and all such matters as are properly provided for by banks, the ascertained surplus available from the operations of the bank during each financial year shall be applied by the board as follows: (a) if the rest fund of the bank is less than the paid-up capital, one third of such surplus shall be allocated to the rest fund and the residue shall be paid to the Receiver General and placed to the credit of the consolidated revenue fund; (b) if the rest fund is not less than the paid-up capital, one fifth of such surplus shall be allocated to the rest fund until the rest fund reaches an amount five times the paid-up capital and the residue shall be paid to the Receiver General and placed to the credit of the consolidated revenue fund; and (c) if the rest fund is not less than five times the paid-up capital the whole of such surplus shall be paid to the Receiver General and placed to the credit of the consolidated revenue fund."
The surplus is used for the general purposes of the Government of Canada.
2. Bank of Canada's surplus paid to Receiver General of Canada: (in dollars)
1935*	346,184.33
1936	1,141,247.03
1937	1,209,397.57
1938	1,110,200.65
1939	1,092,483.47
1940	2,546,306.73
1941	3,725,590.53
1942	7,985,230.43
1943	14,117,830.91
1944	18,078,893.71
1945	22,541,920.92
1946	21,011,194.96
1947	18,828,325.43
1948	19,107,147.20
1949	20,442,378.11
1950	19,662,548.41
1951	24,018,017.44
1952	28,791,710.42
1953	43,867,807.22
1954	41,411,919.15
1955	38,341,041.14
Questions

1956	89,865,102.97
1957	68,711,435.27
1958	88,631,680.16
1959	74,011,728.12
1960	90,175,488.81
1961	107,692,994.18
1962	96,680,127.56
1963	116,386,458.94
* Bank of Canada March 11, 1935.	opened for business



TRAIN SPEEDS IN NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION

Mr. Howe (Wellinglon-Huron): Has the board of transport commissioners issued any orders governing the speed of trains within the national capital region and, if so, what is the date and the operative nature of each such order and to what lines or areas does each apply?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada advise as follows
Canadian Pacific Railway
Carleton Place	Subdivision:	Area, OttawaWest (Mile 0.0)	to mile 27.0 near CarletonPlace, Ont. Board Order	Date	Mileage	Restriction	Operative Nature81070	Mar. 25/53	0.32	10 m.p.h.	Over Hinchey ave., Ottawa.77595	Oct. 22/51	1.78	25 m.p.h.	Over Prescott highway, Ottawa.Prescott Subdivision: Area,	Ottawa West (Mile 0.0) to Mile 22.5 south of Osgoode, Ont.	Board Order	Date	Mileage	Restriction	Operative Nature91785	June 12/57	1.34	25 m.p.h.	Over Prescott highway, Ottawa.Sussex Street	Subdivision:	Area, Ellwood (Mile 0.0) to Ottawa (Sussex st. Mile 6.7)	Board Order	Date	Mileage	Restriction	Operative Nature81704	July 2/53	3.55	10 m.p.h.	Over Russell road, Ottawa.96261	Nov. 17/58	1.29	40 m.p.h.	Over Metcalfe rd. (Bank st.) Ottawa.Ottawa Terminals Subdivision: Area, Hurdman (Mile 85.9)	via Ottawa Union Stationand Hull, Que. to	Ottawa West (Mile 91.6).	Board Order	Date	Mileage	Restriction	Operative Nature80682	Jan. 23/53	89.11	10 m.p.h.	Over St. Florence st., Hull, Que.82352	Oct. 14/53	89.16	10 m.p.h.	Over Henri st., Hull, Que.67101	Mar. 5/46	89.30	10 m.p.h.	Over St. Hyacinthe st., Hull, Que.Statutory	June 6/25	89.27	10 m.p.h.	Over St. Redempteur st., Hull, Que.Lachute Subdivision: Area, Hull East (Mile 117.9) to Mile 99.0 east of Thurso, Que.	Board Order	Date	Mileage	Restriction	Operative Nature76759 81166	June 11/59	100.1	20 m.p.h.	Applies to westward movements over public crossing at grade.Nov. 29/52	111.91	10 m.p.h.	Amended to 30 m.p.h. by B.O. 99490
99490	Oct. 19/59	111.91	30 m.p.h.	Over Main st. crossing Gatineau, Que.
Maniwaki Subdivision: Area, Hull (Mile 0.0)to Mile 25.0 south of Farrellton, Que.				
Board Order	Date	Mileage	Restriction	Operative Nature76067	Feb. 10/51	22.9	10 m.p.h.	Over highway in village of Alcove.Waltham Subdivision: Area,	Wamo (Mile 0.0)	to Wyman	(Mile 33.7)Board Order	Date	Mileage	Restriction	Operative NatureStatutory	Aug. 8/24	7.7	10 m.p.h.	Over Lake st., Aylmer, Que.

Note: Railway subdivision mileage at boundaries of national capital region are approximate only and were scaled from map of Ottawa and national capital region, 1963 edition, published by the information and historical division of the national capital commission.
"Statutory" shown under board order designates speed restrictions imposed under the Railway Act.



IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION, 1963

Mr. Webb: 1.	What was the total Immigration to Canada in 1963?
2.	What was the total emigration from Canada in 1963?


Maurice Lamontagne: 1. 93,151.
2. Canada does not exercise any form of exit control over persons departing from this country and, consequently, there is no way
3.
Location
High level, west boundary
of Wood Buffalo national park
Grimshaw, N.W.T. boundary (reconstruction)
4.	No, although the road from High Level to the park boundary is designed to connect with a partly constructed park road to achieve this ultimate result.



WOOD BUFFALO PARK ACCESS ROAD

Mr. Lambert: 1.	Have any survey work and road allowance clearing been done with respect to either a forest access road or a road to resources in Wood Buffalo national park and, if so, when was this work done and at what cost?
2.	Were there discussions and/or correspondence with the government of the province of Alberta with respect to connecting links or extensions to such a road or roads beyond the limits of the park to existing provincial highway connections and, if so, when and what were the results thereof?


Mr. Laing:: 1. No. All roads in the park have been constructed as development roads or park administrative roads. A development road from Fort Smith to the west boundary of the park has been under construction and is in use as a winter road. Expenditures to date are:
Questions
of determining precisely how many people leave Canada to take up permanent residence in other countries.
Emigration from Canada for 1963 is estimated at 76,000 persons.



ROADS TO RESOURCES PROGRAM, ALBERTA

Mr. Lambert: 1.	What has been the participation of the province of Alberta in the road to resources program, since its inception?
2.	What has been the amount of the federal contribution to the program with respect to the province of Alberta?
3.	What is the location of the roads built under this program in Alberta and the cost of each in total and to the federal government?
4. Has there ever been a submission by the province of Alberta under this program for a road from High Level, Alberta, to Fort Smith, N.W.T., via Wood Buffalo national park and, if so, when?


Arthur Laing: 1. Information forwarded by the province indicates a total of $13,447,717.
2. $6,596,382 (to February 29, 1964).
Estimated total cost	Total expenditure reported to date	Federal share to date$	$	$3,380,000	943,038	471,51917,000,000	12,504,679	6,124,763Surveys:	(a) 1957: Preliminary survey-Peace Point to west boundary $72,000; (b) 1958-1960:	Location survey, Pine Lake,-
Peace Point, west boundary $170,000.
Construction:	(a)	1958:	Right of way
clearing, Peace Point to west boundary $462,000; (b) 1958-1959: Completion right of way clearing Peace Point-west boundary $139,000; (c) 1961: Right of way clearing and clean-up, Pine Lake to Peace Point, $25,000 (completed); (d) 1961: Grading and gravelling, Pine Lake to Peace Point, $315,000 (completed).
2. Yes. Under the roads to resources agreement with the province, December 23, 1959, the federal government agreed to share, on a 50-50 basis, the cost of constructing the 115-mile road from the Mackenzie highway at High Level to the west boundary of the park, if this could be done within the total expenditures envisaged in the agreement. To date the province has constructed 34 miles of road, starting at High Level, and cleared an additional 39 miles of right of way.

Questions



R.C.M.P. SPACE IN MUNICIPAL BUILDING, TERRACE, B.C.

Mr. Howard: Has the R.C.M. Police, any of its officers or personnel, or anyone on behalf of the R.C.M. Police raised any objections or complaints or made any observations or reports concerning space or the location thereof in the presently being built municipal building at Terrace, B.C.?


Guy Favreau: No objections or complaints have been raised, however, a number of observations and reports have been made concerning space or the location thereof.



REFUSAL OF REMISSIONS, B.C. PENITENTIARY

Mr. Howard: 1.	For the month of September 1963 was any inmate in the B.C. penitentiary notified that, after a review of the conduct, industry and attitude of the said inmate, he had failed to earn the possible three days remission for that month and, if so, how many said inmates were so notified?
2.	Without disclosing the names of the said inmates, what were the reasons in each case for the failure to earn the said remission?


Guy Favreau: 1. Sixty two inmates of the British Columbia penitentiary failed to earn the possible three days remission for the month of September, 1963. All inmates were so notified.
2. (a) Twenty eight inmates failed to earn three days remission because of their lack of industry at work or because of their poor conduct. This decision was taken by the institutional grading board, (b) Thirty two inmates failed to earn three days remission by reason of dissociation or because of disciplinary offences having been committed by them, (c) Two inmates failed to earn three days remission because they escaped from the William Head institution.



REDUCTION OF AIR FARES

Mr. Laiulippe: 1.	What stand did Trans-Canada Air Lines adopt during the negotiations of I.A.T.A. for the reduction of air fares?
2.	What decisions were reached by Trans-Canada Air Lines in this regard?
3.	Did the government make representations to other Canadian air carriers, or did it suggest to those companies a policy with respect to the I.A.T.A. negotiations?

Answer: 1. T.C.A. advocated a substantial lowering of basic fares.
2. Traffic conferences of the International Air Transport Association operate under a procedure whereby fares adopted must have the unanimous approval of all member carriers operating in the area affected. The fare proposals of T.C.A. were not acceptable, and in the final analysis T.C.A. agreed to fares involving a lesser reduction. These fares will become effective April 1.

3.	The air transport board, consulted with Canadian Pacific Airlines and Trans-Canada Air Lines prior to and during the course of fare negotiations, and told the carriers the board would not approve new rates unless they represented a downward revision of the existing ones.



NORTHERN AFFAIRS


Mr. Fisher: 1.	Does the department of northern affairs employ a full time teacher of French in Ottawa and, if so (a) when was this arrangement introduced (b) what is the statute or regulation and the vote to which this expense is charged?
2.	What person in northern affairs hired the teacher and what were the arrangements made with the civil service commission?


Arthur Laing: 1. Yes; (a) July 1, 1963. (b) Employed under the teaching staff regulations (P.C. 1960-25/1282 of 22/9/60); expenses charged to vote 1, Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources.
2. Employed by authority of the minister following the approval of treasury board. Teaching positions have been excluded from the Civil Service Act on recommendation of the civil service commission under section 74 of the act.



*C.B.C. PROGRAM &quot;VIEWPOINT&quot;  COMMENTATORS

Mr. Korchinski: 1.	Who is responsible for the choice of commentators on the C.B.C. television program "Viewpoint"?
2.	Are commentators chosen by appointment, or do they request the opportunity to speak on a subject?
3.	Is the choice of the subject matter used on the program suggested to the commentator?
4.	What are the bases which determine a commentator's qualifications to express his or her point of view on a particular subject?
5.	Is the script of any commentary edited by anyone prior to its presentation on television?


Mr. Stewarl:: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows:
1.	The selection of commentators, as of participants in all other programs, is the responsibility of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as a whole. However, the series referred to is in the program area of public affairs, and speakers are invited by members of the public affairs department, under the general direction of the management and program direction of the network.
2.	Commentators are chosen and invited to speak by the C.B.C. Commentators sometimes make suggestions to the C.B.C., and the C.B.C. sometimes accepts these suggestions.
3.	In general, yes. The choice of subject matter is the responsibility of the corporation. It is usually suggested to the commentator in broad terms, and may be modified through

discussion with him. It is also common for unsolicited commentaries to be received by recording from abroad under circumstances where no prior discussion is possible with the commentator. In such cases the corporation decides whether or not to make use of the commentaries as they stand, having regard both to the subject and to the quality of the material.
4.	The commentator's knowledge of the subject and his general reputation and ability as a broadcaster.
5.	Yes, all scripts are subject to editing by the C.B.C. for style, timing, and to ensure that the scripts meet the corporation's standard of fair comment and that no breach of the law is involved. No attempt is made to influence the point of view expressed by the commentator.



* &quot;VIEWPOINT&quot; COMMENTATORS YVON TURCOT AND RON COLLISTER

Mr. Korchinski: 1.	For what reason was Yvon Turcot chosen for the telecast "Viewpoint", as carried by the C.B.C. on March 3, 1964?
2.	What were his qualifications and where was he employed, or in what capacity did he act in the last 10 years?
3.	Was the subject matter of his talk known to any officials of the C.B.C. prior to delivery?
4.	Was Ron Collister, who appeared on "Viewpoint" on March 4, requested to appear, and was the subject matter of his talk suggested to him by the C.B.C. or any government official or minister of the crown?


John B. Stewart: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows:
1.	Because the C.B.C. judged him able to give expression to a point of view which was relevant to a matter which was being publicly debated at the time.
2.	Employed for the last ten years in newspaper, radio and other related fields.
3.	Yes.
4.	Yes. The subject matter was suggested by the C.B.C.; not by any government official or minister of the crown.



OWNER OF MACDONALD BUILDING, OTTAWA

Mr. Marcoux: 1.	Who is the owner of the Macdonald building located on Slater street between Metcalfe and O'Connor streets?
2.	If the said building is owned by a company, what are the names and addresses of its directors?
3.	What is the duration of the lease entered into by the federal government?

Answer:	1. Metcalfe Realty Company
Limited.
Questions
2.	Thomas G. Fuller, 313 Acadia rd., Rock-cliffe, Ont.; W. O. Varette, 444 Mansfield ave., Ottawa, Ont.; W. S. Burnside, Honeygabies, R.R, No. 5, Ottawa, Ont.
3.	Eight years starting January 1, 1964.



CUSTOMS AND EXCISE


Mr. Macquarrie: 1.	For what reasons are university students who are residents of the provinces of Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland, and Manitoba ineligible for employment under the civil service of Canada as customs excise officers-casual under competition 64-2001?
2.	Are there any summer positions as customs excise officers for which residents of the three provinces may apply?


Maurice Lamontagne: I am advised by the civil
service commission.
1.	Competitions to recruit university students for casual employment as customs excise officers are advertised only in provinces where the Department of National Revenue anticipates and reports that summer casual help will be required. The advertising pattern is in accordance with the provisions of section 35 of the Civil Service Act. A locality preference (within each province concerned) is also indicated on the competition poster.
2.	The Department of National Revenue has not reported any need for casual help in this category in the provinces of Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland or Manitoba.



C.N.R. RUN THROUGH PROGRAM

Mr. Orlikow: Is the management of the C.N.R. making plans to implement the run through program proposed some time ago and then suspended and, if so, when will this program begin?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The management of Canadian National Railways advise that this is a matter of internal operation of the railway, and that whenever such implementation is contemplated discussions will be held with the union representatives at the appropriate time.



LIVERPOOL HARBOUR, N.S.  DREDGING

Mr. Crouse: Will the Minister of Public Works give immediate consideration to dredging Liverpool harbour in Queens county, Nova Scotia in order to provide adequate channels for the large fishing draggers and commercial ships presently using this port?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: The necessity for dredging Liverpool harbour is reviewed periodically and maintenance dredging is carried out whenever required. Arrangements are being made for an up to date survey.

Questions



*DATJPHIN, MAN.-DESIGNATION AS DEPRESSED AREA

Mr. Forbes: Has Dauphin, Manitoba been designated a depressed area and, if so, what steps are being taken to alleviate the unemployment situation there?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: No. The Dauphin local office area of the national employment service is
not among the 35 areas that have been designated as development areas.



CENTRAL MORTGAGE AND HOUSING FUND

Mr. Latulippe: 1.	What have been the various increases or decreases in the C.M.H.C. fund since its inception showing (a) amount (b) date?
2.	What was the amount of the original fund?
3.	What is the present amount in the fund?

20220-85J
Answer:



CENTRAL MORTGAGE AND HOUSING CORPORATION MORTGAGE INSURANCE FUND

[Stage Direction]
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF THE RESERVES FOR EACH YEAR FROM 1954 TO 1963*
1954	1955	1956	1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	1963	TotalFees and premiums received 	$ 2,389,850	$ 9,237,250	$ 9,839,746	$ 7,278,911	$ 13,816,071	$ 13,146,403	$ 8,456,279	$ 10,970,952	$ 11,576,518	$ 9,868,191	$ 96,580,171Net income from securities and other assets	5,474	151,935	521,573	940,144	1,499,812	2,254,484	3,058,039	3,201,651	3,687,228	3,966,334	19,286,674Real estate acquired on claims	-	-	-	38,185	62,130	275,336	1,496,596	9,840,791	9,714,641	12,807,854	34,235,5332,395,324	9,389,185	,10,361,319	8,257,240	15,378,013	15,676,223	13,010,914	24,013,394	24,978,387	26,642,379	150,102,378Deduct: Claims paid and legal expenses	-	-	-	38,185	62,130	275,336	1,496,596	9,840,791	9,714,641	12,807,854	34,235,5332,395,324	9,389,185	10,361,319	8,219,055	15,315,883	15,400,887	11,514,318	14,172,603	15,263,746	13,834,525	115,866,845**
* The Mortgage Insurance Fund was established when the National Housing Act, 1954, was assented to on March 18, 1954. ** As at December 31, 1963, the contingent liability of the Mortgage Insurance Fund was $4,499,000,000.
[Stage Direction]

Questions

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 352
Mr. MacLean (Queens):: 1.	Have suitable sites been obtained for new post offices in Crapaud, North Rustico, and Mount Stewart, Prince Edward Island and, if so (a) what was the cost of the site in each case, and (b) from whom was it purchased?
2.	What is the target date for completion of construction in each case?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. A suitable site has been acquired at Crapaud, Prince Edward Island, (a) $1,000. (b) Mr. A. P. Simmons. Sites have not been acquired at North Rustico or Mount Stewart.
2. Crapaud-late in April, 1964.



TRENTON, N.S., AIRPORT IMPROVEMENTS

Mr. MacEwan: Are improvements to be made to the airport at Trenton, Pictou county, Nova Scotia, during the year 1964-65 and, if so (a) what amount is to be expended, and (b) what do the improvements include?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The department has no plans for improvements to the airport at Trenton, Pictou county, Nova Scotia, during the year 1964-65.



MILITIA TRAINING TIME

Mr. MacEwan: 1.	What was the yearly allotment for each individual militia soldier in each army command in Canada for the past training season?
2.	What is the present allotment of training time for each individual militia soldier in each army command in Canada?
Answer: 1 and 2. The number of days for which militia soldiers may receive pay for training time is at the discretion of general officers commanding within the limits of funds alloted to each command. The maximum number of days training for which pay may be granted is as follows: (a) militia group commanders, unit commanders and quartermasters, 50 days; (b) seconds in command, adjutants, training officers and grade 1 staff, officers at militia group headquarters, 45 days; (c) all other officers and men, 40 days; (d) student militia, 55 days.
Where circumstances warrant an individual may be granted up to 70 days pay as a special case on authority of the general officer commanding.
The above restrictions do not apply in the event of special training programs. In all cases pay in excess of 70 days will be approved by general officers commanding and must be within the limits of funds allotted.
Seven days summer training plus travelling time is authorized for the average militiaman and is within the maximum number of days training allowed. Members of the Canadian women's army corps are granted 14 days.



POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION, PICTOU COUNTY, N.S.

Mr. MacEwan: 1.	Have sites been secured for all, or any of the post offices to be constructed at Scotsburn, Merigo-mish, Thorburn, Hopewell and Eureka, in Pictou county, Nova Scotia?
2.	If properties have been secured for any, or all of the sites, what was the amount paid for each, and were alternative bids secured?
3.	When will construction commence on these post offices and what is the expected completion date?
4.	If the site has not been secured in any of these locations, is it the intention of the government to continue its efforts to secure same, or to postpone the project?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. A site for a post office has been secured at Merigomish. Sites have not been acquired at Scotsburn, Thorburn, Hopewell or Eureka.
2.	Part of the site at Merigomish is now being expropriated from Mrs. F. Smith for an agreed consideration of $350. The remainder is being acquired from the department of highways of the province of Nova Scotia for an agreed consideration of $35. The selected site was considered along with others but no alternate bids were secured.
3.	The contract for the post office at Merigomish has been awarded. It is scheduled for completion in May, 1964.
4.	Where sites have not been secured the projects have been deferred.



POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION, COMPTON-FRONTENAC CONSTITUENCY, QUE.

Mr. Latulippe: 1.	Did the Department of Public Works commence construction of any post offices in the constituency of Compton-Frontenac during 1962-63, and, if so, how many post offices were involved?
2.	Of this total, how many post offices were completed, where were they built, how much did each cost, who was the contractor, and how many men worked on each project?
3.	How many post offices have not yet been completed, where are they situated, what is their estimated cost, and who are the contractors?
4.	What were the names of all the tenderers for each project in 1962-63, what was the amount of each tender, and what were the reasons for choosing the successful tenderer in each case?

Answer: 1. No.
2, 3 and 4. Not applicable.



WHARF REPAIRS, ARICHAT, N.S.

Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
1.	Have tenders been called for a wharf repair job at Arichat, Nova Scotia, and, if so, what were the names and amounts of all those who tendered?
2.	Has a contract been awarded and, if so, to whom?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. Yes; G. J. Forgeron, West Arichat, Richmond county, Nova Scotia, $10,600.
2. Contract has not yet been awarded.



C.N.R. DELIVERY SERVICE, SOUTHAMPTON, ONT.

Mr. Loney: 1.	What is the name of the appointee to the C.N.R. delivery service in Southampton, Ontario?
2.	What is the remuneration paid the appointee?
3.	How many applications for the appointment were received by the C.N.R.?
4.	What are the names of the applicants and what was the remuneration requested by each applicant?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The management of Canadian National Railways advise that it has not been the practice of the management to disclose information from personal files of officers and employees, and the sessional committee on railways, air lines and shipping has supported this position in the past. Management advises that appointments of officials
Questions
are made upon a judgment evaluation of the qualifications and experience of the individuals concerned.



WINTER WORKS, COMPTON-FRONTENAC CONSTITUENCY, QUE.

Mr. Laiulippe: 1.	What municipalities in the constituency of Compton-Frontenac participated in the winter works program?
2.	What amount has the government granted to each municipality and what was the nature of the works undertaken in each case?
3.	What was the approximate number of workers involved in each case and what salaries were they paid?
4.	How many unemployed persons were able to find work on each of these projects?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: 1. See statement following.
2.	See statement following.
3.	This information will not be available until detailed claims have been received.
4.	This information will not be available until detailed claims have been received.



MUNICIPAL WINTER. WORKS INCENTIVE PROGRAM 1963-64

[Stage Direction]
Province of Quebec	Electoral District of Compton-Frontenac		
Number	Estimated	Estimated	Estimatedof	number of	payroll cost	Fed. Govt.project	Municipality	Description	men employed	during period	payroll costsQue.	88	Audet	... Road improvements	90	$ 7,500	$ 4,500Que.	135	Bury (Rural)	... Road and sidewalk construction	35	10,000	5,000Que.	386	Cookshire (Town)	... Installation of sewers, improvements to garage	20	12,000	6,000Que.	2404	Cookshire (Town)	. . . Construction of vault in town hall and clearing road	10	5,000	2,500Que.	1718	Compton (Township)	... Branch cutting on road aides	12	5,000	2,500Que.	1710	Compton (Village)	... Installation of water main	10	25,000	12,500Que.	1209	Compton Station	... Brushing along roads	10	3,000	1,500Que.	1454	Ditton (Township)	. .. Gravelling roads and digging ditches	50	14,300	7,150Que.	1149	East Angus (Town)	... Improvements to garage and municipal buildings	240	140,915	70,457Que.	2069	Eaton (Township)	... Road improvements	15	2,000	1,000Que.	854	Emberton (Township)	... Digging ditches	30	1,200	000Que.	517	Frontenac (Parish)	... Installation of sewers	40	12,000	7,200Que.	516	Gayhurst (Parish)	... Brush cutting and digging ditches along roads	40	7,000	4,200Que.	842	Hampden (Township)	... Brush cutting along roads, construction of culverts	25	8,000	4,000Que.	2000	Hereford (Canton)	... Brushing along roads	20	2,000	1,000Que.	538	La Guadeloupe (Village)	... Road improvements, fence construction	35	21,250	12,750Que.	1836	La Guadeloupe (Village)	... Construction of a fire station	40	25,625	15,375Que.	1351	Lac Megantic (Town)	... Improvements to dam, construction of retaining wall	75	68,000	40,800Que.	1434	Lac Megantic (Town)	... Installation of water mains and sewers	25	13,000	7,800Que.	2412	Lac Megantic (Town)	... Construction of retaining wall	80	30,000	18,000Que.	1390	La Patrie (Village)	... Street construction	10	1,000	500Que.	754	Lingwick (Township)	... Moving telephone lines	60	9,000	4,500Que.	458	Marston (Township)	... Road improvements	20	6,000	3,600Que.	1428	Martin ville	... Road construction	8	1,600	800Que.	431	Milan (Parish)	... Road improvements	40	10,000	6,000Que.	453	Nantes	... Installation of sewers, construction of reservoirs	100	25,000	15,000Que.	454	Nantes	... Digging ditches, construction of sidewalks	10	2,400	1,440Que.	710	Notre-Dame-des-Bois	... Improvements to fire station and skating rink	35	15,000	9,000Que.	839	Piopolis (Parish)	... Construction of sidewalks, digging ditches	25	6,500	3,900Que.	2183	Sawyerville (Village)	... Improvements to reservoirs	10	4,400	2,200Que.	66	Scotstown (Town)	.. . Digging ditches, improvements to swimming pool	25	7,000	3,500Que.	67	Scotstown (Town)	... Installation of water main	12	2,600	1,300Que.	546	Val Racine (Parish)	... Road improvements, completion of municipal garage	50	10,000	6,000Que.	790	Westbury (Township)	... Construction of fence and culverts	20	2,000	1,000Que.	1265	Winslow South (Parish)	... Construction of sidewalks, digging ditches	30	3,500	2,100Que.	783	Woburn (Parish)	... Development of playground, improvements to municipal building	20	3,950	1,975Que.	440	Ste. Cecile-de-Whitton (Parish)	... Road improvements	60	7,000	4,200Que.	939	St Edwidge-de-Clifton (Township) Installation of sewers	30	8,000	4,000Que.	1494	St. Hermenegilde	... Brushing along roads	25	4,500	2,250Que.	1306	St. Robert Bellarmin (Parish). .	... Digging ditches, installation of culverts	160	38,000	22,800Que.	2167	St. Robert Bellarmin (Parish)..	... Road construction	85	25,000	15,000Que.	437	St. Romain (Village)	... Digging ditches	15	4,000	2,400Que.	751	St. Sebastien (Parish)	... Brushing along roads	15	3,500	2,1001344	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Questions

Mr. Slefanson: Has the federal government received a request from the province of Manitoba to establish a biological station at Grand Rapids, Manitoba to deal with freshwater fisheries in western Canada and, if so, what action has been taken or what action is planned?
Answer: No.



CLOSING OF U.S. REFUELING BASE, R.C.A.F. STATION NAMAO

Mr. Lambert: 1.	What is the proposed date of closing of the
S.A.C. refueling base at R.C.A.F. station Namao, the intention of closing having recently been announced by the Minister of National Defence?
2.	What consideration has been given to the redeployment of civilian personnel employed at the said refueling base?
3.	Has any decision been reached as yet as to an alternative use for the building and facilities used for the refueling base and, if so, what is this decision?
4.	If not, when is such a decision anticipated?
Answer: 1. July 1, 1964.
2.	All employees will be interviewed by personnel officers of the Department of National Defence to determine their availability for transfer beyond the immediate locality, in the event that they cannot be placed in employment locally. All employees will be interviewed and registered by the national employment service. The civil service commission and government departments in the area will be provided with particulars affecting all employees scheduled for lay-off. Every effort will be made to find other employment for those persons and these efforts will continue after the closing of the strategic air command refueling operations at R.C.A.F. station Namao. The employees for whom other employment cannot be found will be placed on an official lay-off list and will be given preference in appointment to future vacancies with the government service.
3.	Title to the buildings and fixed facilities which will be vacated by the S.A.C. detachment will remain with the Department of National Defence. The subsequent use to be made of these facilities will be determined in the light of over-all defence requirements taking into consideration recent organizational changes which have taken place in the Edmonton area.
4.	It is anticipated that a decision on reallocation of the buildings and facilities will be reached either before or shortly after the close out date of July 1.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AND ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS

Mr. Boulanger: 1.	How many persons in Canada received unemployment insurance benefits during October 1962?
Questions
2.	How many persons in Canada received unemployment assistance payments during October 1963?


Maurice Lamontagne: 1. There is no figure available of the number of persons receiving unemployment insurance benefit in any month. The number of active claimants, i.e. the number of persons claiming benefits in Canada at October 31, 1962, was 244,140.
2. The Unemployment Assistance Act permits the provinces six months in which to submit claims, and thus the figures for October 1963 are incomplete; however, up to March 3, 1964, payments for 478,535 persons, including dependents, had been included in reimbursement claims submitted under the unemployment assistance agreements for October. The last month for which complete returns are available is July 1963, when the number included in claims was 650,557.



CONSTRUCTION OF PENAL INSTITUTION, NORTHWEST TERRITORIES

Mr. Rheaume: 1.	Does the government intend to proceed with the construction of a minimum security penal institution in the Northwest Territories and, if so, where is the intended location of such institution?
2.	Have the plans and specifications of the project been completed and, if so, when is it intended to call for public tenders on the job?
3.	What are the proposed dates of commencement of construction and completion of the project?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. Yes; at Yellowknife.
2.	The plans and specifications for this project have not yet been started but it is expected they will be completed in time to call tenders this fall.
3.	It is anticipated that construction will start in late 1964 with completion scheduled for late 1965.



PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS-RENOVATION OF EAST BLOCK

Mr. Mather: Is consideration being given to renovating the east block of the parliament buildings and, if so, to what extent?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Consideration is being given to making necessary alterations at the appropriate time.



WINTER CONSTRUCTION BONUS APPLICATIONS, LAKE ST. JOHN COUNTY, QUE.

Mr. Lessard (Lake St.: John):
How many applications for $500 winter house construction bonus have been received from the county of Lake St. John?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Twenty three applications for the $500 winter house construction bonus have been received from the county of Lake St. John. Of these one application was found

Questions
ineligible for the incentive payment at the time first inspection was carried out by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.



AIR TRANSPORT LICENCE TO QUEBECAIR

Mr. Marcoux: 1.	Does the Minister of Transport or the hoard of transport commissioners intend to award Que-becair exclusive rights of air transportation between Sept lies, Baie Comeau, Saguenay, Quebec city and Montreal?
2.	Do they intend to enable that company to operate exclusively between the Magdalen islands and Montreal, via Chandler?


John Whitney Pickersgill: 1 and 2. Quebecair has made no applications to the air transport board for exclusive rights between the points indicated, and in consequence no consideration has been given to the matter.



GOLDEN HAWKS ACROBATIC TEAM

Mr. Fleming (Okanagan-: Revelsioke):
With reference to the decision of the government to discontinue the operations of the Golden Hawks aerobatic flying team (a) what were the reasons for the team's disbandment (b) where and how many times did the Golden Hawks perform after their formation (c) what was the original cost of each of the Golden Hawk's Sabre jet aircraft and the Red Knight T-33 trainer (d) what was the annual maintenance and performance cost of the above aircraft for (i) fuel (ii) parts (iii) other specified costs (e) what is the anticipated saving by their disbandment both in direct detail and indirect detail (f) who were the pilots last year and what was their rank and pay (g) who was responsible for their maintenance and, if the R.C.A.F., what were the names, rank and pay of personnel employed (h) in what other countries are Sabre jet aircraft currently operational?
Answer: (a) The reasons for the disbandment of the Golden Hawks were given in detail in a statement by the Minister of National Defence on February 7, 1964. The principal reasons were the necessity to use the expenditures required to operate the team for more vital defence needs, and the fact that the F-86 Sabre aircraft flown by the Hawks is no longer in operational service in the R.C.A.F. and will soon be difficult and costly to maintain.
(b)	Since the formation of the Golden Hawks aerobatic team in May 1959 they have performed 317 times in Canada and the United States.
(c)	The original cost of each of the F-86 Sabre jet aircraft was $289,000 and the Red Knight T-33 trainer was $165,000.
(d)	(i) Fuel and oil, $146,000; (ii) spares, repair and overhaul, $259,000; (iii) base support, $84,000.
(e)	(i) military personnel cost, $289,000; (ii) fuel and oil, $122,000; (iii) spares, repair and overhaul, $230,000; (iv) base support costs, $71,000; total, $712,000.

(f)	Wing Commander R. J. Hatton, commanding officer; Squadron Leader J. L. Hubbard, team leader; Flight Lieutenant L. W. Grip; Flight Lieutenant D. J. Barker; Flight Lieutenant C. B. Lang; Flight Lieutenant A. Young; Flight Lieutenant E. J. L. Mc-Keogh; Flight Lieutenant N. J. Garriock.
The annual pay cost of these eight pilots was $72,608; the pilots for the Red Knight aircraft were provided from within training command resources on an as required basis.
(g)	The R.C.A.F. was responsible for the maintenance of the Golden Hawks. The maintenance force consisted of Flight Lieutenant C. G. Peterson, 1 flight sergeant, 4 sergeants, 14 corporals and 29 aircraftmen with a combined annual pay cost of $216,199. The Red Knight aircraft was maintained by the addition of 1 sergeant, 2 corporals and 9 aircraftmen positions to the training command establishment at an annual pay cost of $50,724.
(h)	Effective December 1963.
Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Colombia,
Denmark, Ethiopia, Formosa, Italy, Iran, Greece, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Philippines, Peru, Pakistan, Spain, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Thailand, United States of America, Venezuela, West Germany, Yugoslavia.



CLOSING OF RADAR STATIONS, QUEBEC

Mr. Laprise: 1.	To what extent does the government intend to help the civilian employees who will be affected by the closing of the radar station in (a) Parent (b) St. Sylvestre?
2.	What departments will be called upon to cooperate in order to permit the government to achieve the desired results with regard to the assistance it wishes to give to the civilian employees affected by the closing of the radar station in (a) Parent (b) St. Sylvestre?

Answer: 1 and 2. All employees will be interviewed by personnel officers of the Department of National Defence to determine their availability for transfer beyond the immediate locality, in the event that they cannot be placed in employment locally. All employees will be interviewed and registered by the national employment service. The civil service commission and government departments in the area will be provided with particulars affecting all employees scheduled for lay-off. Every effort will be made to find other employment for these persons and these efforts will continue after the stations at Parent and St. Sylvestre are closed down. The employees for whom other employment cannot be found will be placed on an official lay-off list and will be given preference in appointment to future vacancies with the government service.



APPLICATION FOR AIRPORT, CHIBOUGAMAU, QUE.

Mr. Laprise: Has the municipal corporation of Chibougamau, Chapleau county, applied for a permit to operate an airport in the vicinity of that town and, if so, what position has the government taken with regard to the application and what assistance will it give the town in this matter?

Answer: Yes, an application for an airport licence for an airfield on Hamel island was received on August 22, 1963. At the time of application the airfield was not sufficiently developed to meet the standard required for public use. The town indicated that the necessary improvements were to be undertaken and the the department would be advised when the work had been completed. Prior to receipt of the application for an airport licence, officers of the department visited municipal authorities and explained the safety and technical requirements which must be met before the airfield could be licensed. In this connection written guidance material was also presented to the town of Chibougamau for their assistance. To date no notification has been received from the municipality advising that the necessary improvements have been completed.



VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION ACT


Mr. Laprise: Has the federal government come to an agreement with the province of Quebec in respect of the Vocational Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Act and in respect of the co-ordination of rehabilitation services and, if so (a) when was the agreement reached (b) for how long is it to remain in effect (c) what are the terms of the agreement?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: No. (a), (b) and (c) not applicable.



EXPROPRIATION OF POST OFFICE SITES, N.S.

Mr. Coates: 1.	What legal steps were taken by the government to institute expropriation proceedings in connection with the securing of sites for the Westchester and Joggins post offices?
2.	What legal firm was employed to institute the proceedings in question?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. Sites for post offices at Westchester station and Joggins, Nova Scotia, were expropriated on February 13, 1964. In both cases there was mutual agreement and the owners consented to expropriation to assure immediate quick clear title.
2. At Westchester station the agent employed for the Minister of Justice was Mr. R. F. McCunn, barrister and solicitor, River Philip, Nova Scotia. At Joggins the agent 20220-86
Questions
for the Minister of Justice was Mr. A. R. Lusby, barrister and solicitor, 39 Victoria street, Amherst, Nova Scotia.



WHARF REPAIRS, WALLACE, N.S.

Mr. Coates: When will tenders be called for wharf repairs at Wallace, Nova Scotia and what will be the nature of such repairs?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Tenders have been advertised and are due April 15; the work will involve construction of an ell on the outer end of the existing wharf; renewal of the decking over the outer portion of the existing structure; and the paving of the approach section of the wharf.



POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION BIDS, WESTCHESTER, N.S.

Mr. Coaies: 1.	Who was the low bidder for construction of the post office at Westchester and what was the amount of the tender submitted?
2.	Were alternative bids received and, if so, from whom and in what amounts?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. MacBurnie Bros. Limited, Tatamagouche, N.S.-$10,996.87.
2. Yes. D. H. Ryan, Springhill, N.S.-$12,500; A. N. Bayers Contracting Ltd., Halifax, N.S. -$12,686.



EMPLOYMENT ON POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION, WESTCHESTER, N.S.

Mr. Coales: How many residents of the Westchester area have been employed in the construction of the new post office for the area?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Three.



POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYMENT, JOGGINS, N.S.

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 397
Mr. Coales:: How many residents of the Joggins area have been employed in the construction of the new post office for the area?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Three.



POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION BIDS, JOGGINS, N.S.

Mr. Coales: 1.	Who was the low bidder for construction of the post office at Joggins and what was the amount of the tender submitted?
2.	Were alternative bids received and, if so, from whom and in what amounts?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. K. P. Allen Limited, Amherst, N.S., $11,135.
2. Yes. Sherman MacKay, Amherst, N.S., $15,978.75.



*C.B.C. PRODUCTION &quot;THE OPEN GRAVE&quot;

Mr. Rapp: 1. Has the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation taped for screening on Easter Sunday, March 29, a show, titled "The Open Grave"?

Questions
2.	How large Is the cast for this show?
3.	What was the cost of production?
4.	Is this show a satire or caricature of the resurrection of our Lord?
5.	Was any part of it produced by night in Mount Pleasant cemetery in Toronto?
6.	For what purpose is this play being placed before the Canadian people?


John B. Stewart: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows:
1.	The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has recorded on film and videotape a production entiled "The Open Grave" for showing on March 25, not March 29.
2.	The cast numbers 167, of whom 137 are extras.
3.	It has not been customary to require the corporation to give such information as it could affect the corporation in the competitive business in which it is engaged.
4.	No. The program is neither a satire, nor a caricature of the resurrection of our Lord.
5.	Yes.
6.	The program is an allegorical account of the execution of a leader and the disappearance of his body. It is produced as an actuality broadcast as though the events were happening here and now. The theme is considered by the corporation to be a suitable one for the Easter season.


Mr. Rapp:: On a point of order Mr. Speaker, it was stated in the answer given to question No. 403 that the C.B.C. does not disclose the cost of production in such cases, but I should like to point out that the cost of production was announced this morning on the radio.



GOLD SUBSIDIES TO MANITOU-BARVUE MINE, VAL D'OR, QUE.

Mr. Caouelie: Does the Manitou-Barvue mine, of Val d'Or, receive subsidies from the federal government for the production of gold and, if so, what was the amount of these subsidies for each of the last five years?


Mr. Benidickson:: Manitou-Barvue Mines Limited has not been eligible at any time for assistance payments under the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act.



WHARF IMPROVEMENTS, NEW CAMPBELLTON, N.S.

Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
What are the plans of the department concerned for wharf improvements at New Campbellton and how soon will this work commence?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Minor improvements consisting of the placing of sheathing will be carried out. This work is scheduled to follow the lobster fishing season in July.



TENDERS FOR C-8 TRUCKS

Mr. Danforih: 1.	How many tenders were received by the Post Office Department under file 54A-5/8 (64/65) for 150 C-8 trucks?
2.	What was the amount of each of the tenders?
3.	To which company was this contract awarded?


Mr. Nicholson:: 1. Seventeen.
2.	(1) $11,970; (2) $12,367.50; (3) $12,750; (4) $13,153.50; (5) $13,942.50; (6) $14,164.50; (7) $14,700; (8) $15,314.67; (9) $15,714; (10) $16,983; (11) $17,250; (12) $17,325; (13) $17,325; (14) $19,200; (15) $19,928; (16) $22,644; (17) $37,329.
3.	La compagnie Normand Ltee., St. Pascal (Kamouraska Co.) P.Q. ($11,970).



SALE OF LAND AND BUILDINGS, R.C.A.F. STATION, AYLMER, ONT.

Mr. Smith: 1.	What was the purchase price of the land and buildings of the former R.C.A.F. station at Aylmer, Ontario, purchased by the province of Ontario from the Crown Assets Disposal Corporation, and now used as a police college?
2.	What was the purchase price of the land and buildings of the former R.C.A.F. station at Aylmer, Ontario, purchased by the province of Ontario from the Crown Assets Disposal Corporation, and used for other purposes?
Answer: 1 and 2. Crown Assets Disposal Corporation sold 555 acres of land and 14 buildings at the former R.C.A.F. station at Aylmer, Ontario to the government of province of Ontario for $58,000 and later, at the same site, also sold to that government, five plane hangars for the sum of $18,690. The corporation does not have information on record indicating what parts of the lands and buildings are actually being utilized for a police college.



RURAL MAIL TENDERS, RIVER JOHN, N.S.

Mr. MacEwan: 1.	Were revised tenders called for by the Post Office Department for R.R. No. 1, River John, N.S., mail route?
2.	Who was asked to submit a revised tender, and for what reason was the invitation restricted to these persons?
3.	For what reason was the request for revised tenders withdrawn by the Post Office Department?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: 

USE OF JP-4 JET FUEL

Mr. Churchill: 1.	What type of fuel Is being used by T.C.A. aircraft?
2.	Was JP-4 fuel used in the jet aircraft that crashed at St. Therese?
3.	Are the major American air lines using JP-4 fuel?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The management of Trans-Canada Air Lines advise as follows:
1.	T.C.A. uses two types of turbine fuel in accordance with the specifications drawn up by the international air transport association and the American society for testing materials. These fuels are kerosene with a low freeze point, and a wide cut fuel known as JP-4.
2.	Yes.
3.	Many major air lines use both JP-4 and kerosene, as do the military services. Pan American World Airways and Trans World Airlines are the larger users.



EFFECT OF WHEAT SALES ON BALANCE OF PAYMENTS

Mr. Lalulippe: To what extent has the sale of Canadian wheat contributed to reduction of the national debt and the balance of international payments during the last year and, specifically, in what manner has this been achieved?
tTranslation]
Answer: Wheat sales in the current accounts of the Canadian balance of payments in 1963 had an approximate value of $820 million, an increase of more than $200 million over the corresponding 1962 total. They helped reduce Canada's current account deficit from $848 million in 1962 to $521 million in 1963, together with related capital inflows (net figures).



WHARF REPAIRS, WINNIPEG BEACH, MAN.

Mr. Siefanson: Are repairs planned for the wharf at Winnipeg Beach, Manitoba, during the fiscal year 1964-65 and, if so, what is the nature of the repairs and the estimated cost of same?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Yes; extension and improvements to the breakwater wharf at an estimated cost of $14,500.



REFLECTIVE MARKINGS ON BOX CARS

Mr. Mather: 1.	What is the approximate number of railway box cars equipped with safety reflective markings, such as scotchlite?
2.	What is the approximate number of railway box cars still to be so equipped?
3.	What is the approximate annual number of railway box cars being so equipped?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada advise as follows:
20220-86J
Questions
1.	As of December 31, 1963, a total of 31,020 cars were so equipped including approximately 1,400 tank cars.
2.	Approximately 71,631.
3.	Approximately 6,200 annually.



FARM MACHINERY EXPORTS TO RED CHINA

Mr. Fleming (Okanagan-Revelstoke): 1.	Are there any restrictions on the export sale of Canadian manufactured farm machinery to mainland China?
2.	Are there any restrictions on Canadian manufactured farm machinery including American components?
3.	If restrictions do apply to new farm machinery of Canadian manufacture with or without American components, do these restrictions apply to use farm machinery and what is the basis of any such restriction?
Answer: 1. An export permit is required to export goods to any country included in the area control list, which includes mainland China.
2.	Answered by 1.
3.	Whether the goods are new or used is immaterial to the permit requirement.



NATIONAL FLAG


Mr. Coales: With reference to the answer given to starred question No. 54, was there an over-all total of
93.312	signatures received between April 8, 1963 and March 4, 1964 in support of the retention of the red ensign as Canada's national flag?


Maurice Lamontagne: The over-all total of
93.312	signatures was received between April 8, 1963, and February 19, 1964, the date on which question No. 54 was asked and the answer prepared.



C.B.C. TELEVISION STATION, FREDERICTON, N.B.

Mr. MacRae: Have any studies been conducted or is any consideration being given at this time to the construction of a C.B.C. television station in Fredericton, New Brunswick?


Maurice Lamontagne: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that the answer is in the affirmative.



CONSTRUCTION OF NUCLEAR DETECTION AND REPORTING UNITS

Mr. MacRae: Have any discussions been held with the Pentagon relative to the construction in Canada of units of the nuclear detection and reporting system and, if so, what conclusion was reached as a result of these discussions?
Answer: Discussions have been held between Canadian and United States officials on matters of mutual concern relating to civil

Order for Return
defence on a confidential basis. In consequence, the publication of any results of such discussion would require the consent of both the Canadian and United States governments.



CANAL REPAIRS, CHESTER, N.S.

Mr. Crouse: 1.	When will tenders be called for repairs to the canal at Chester, Lunenburg county, Nova Scotia?
2.	What is the amount allocated by the Department of Public Works covering repairs to the canal and bridge?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. The department of highways, province of Nova Scotia, has agreed to construct the bridge and canal approaches starting in the early summer at federal expense. They have also agreed to take over the bridge and approaches as part of the provincial highway system upon completion of the work.
2. It is expected the cost will be about $25,000.



* CALGARY AIRPORT


Mr. Deachman: Has the Minister of Transport received representations regarding the possible hazard to aircraft from high transmission towers proposed to be erected near Calgary international airport and, if so, what steps are being taken to safeguard aviation in the area?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Representations have been received regarding the possible hazard to aircraft from high transmission towers proposed to be erected 12 miles south of Calgary international airport. While these do not constitute an unusual hazard, as a safeguard to aviation in the general area, the towers will be painted in alternating sections of international orange and white and lighted with red obstruction lights. As a further safety measure the location and height of these towers will be shown on appropriate aeronautical charts and a notice to airmen will be issued when construction work commences. These are the normal precautions taken in cases such as this. As this is a technical answer, sir, I may say I give it on the responsibility of my advisers.



QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN


Mr. Matheson: What studies have been or are being conducted by the government with respect to the effects of insecticides upon human, animal and vegetable life?
Return tabled.
[Mr. MacRae.l



PRIVILEGE


Mr. Diefenbaker:: Mr. Speaker, I rise before orders of the day-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. There is a question of privilege from the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot.


Hon. Theogene Ricard (St. Hyacinthe-Bagot):: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker. On February 20 last I put on the order paper the following question:
What standards were used to determine and justify the amount of the increase granted December last to the president of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Mr. Alphonse Ouimet, when his salary was raised from $20,000 to $40,000 per year?
Mr. Speaker, this question has been on the order paper for more than a month and no answer has been given as yet. I am therefore asking the Secretary of State (Mr. Lamon-tagne) when he intends to give an answer.



CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of moving the adjournment of the house, pursuant to standing order 26, to discuss a matter of public urgent concern and importance, namely the outraged religious feelings of Christians of all persuasions and faiths across Canada concerning the television show "The Open Grave", to which reference was made a moment ago in the answer given to question No. 403.
I may say that to my recollection this is the first time I have moved such a motion. According to the answer given, it is to be shown by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation later this week, during holy week, the most sacred and solemn of the Christian year. Irrespective of the answer given to the question, advance information indicates that the showing will be a flagrant, scandalous and sacrilegious insult to a majority of Canadians. I say this because clergymen and outstanding religious leaders in both the Protestant and Roman Catholic churches have so commented.
As one who believes in freedom of speech, freedom of religion and the need for the C.B.C. to be an independent body, I cannot refrain from saying that we as Christians may question whether we include in freedom a licence to malign or hold religious faith up

to contempt. I say this because the C.B.C. is a public institution maintained by the people of Canada. While I have no personal knowledge of the facts connected with it, press reports indicate the show will cost Canada $50,000. That was on the radio this morning, so it must be correct.
I again emphasize this fact, that many leading clergymen of our country are deeply concerned over this particular matter. Therefore I say no more, except that this deserves to be considered by the House of Commons. Believing in freedom, it is our responsibility to ensure freedom as the portion of all our people.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I have to determine whether there is sound and sufficient ground to adjourn the business of the house under standing order 26. As to the importance of the matter discussed by the right hon. Leader of the Opposition, there can be little doubt as to the general interest either for or against, but the criterion on which I have to decide this question is one that has been mentioned several times by previous speakers, namely, is there opportunity to debate this matter in an effective way?
The matter is urgent, important, and certainly of general public interest, but it does seem to me, when we are in a budget debate and when interim supply will be reached on Wednesday, that this whole matter takes on more the appearance of a grievance than of being of sufficient national urgency and importance to adjourn all the proceedings of the house at this time to carry on debate on the proposed motion. Therefore, in view of the fact that opportunity will be given this afternoon in the budget debate and in view of the fact that interim supply, I assume, will be considered by the house on Wednesday next, it seems to me there is opportunity to discuss this important matter.
In the circumstances I regret I do not think that the house should be adjourned under standing order 26.


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Winnipeg South Centre):: May I just ask one question, Mr. Speaker. Was it not said by the parliamentary secretary that this film would be shown on the 25th, which is Wednesday? It is rather late to be debating it on Wednesday when it is to be shown on that very day. Consequently I think there is urgency to consider the matter today, which is the 23rd.


Mr. Speaker:: I am sorry, and I certainly do not wish to get into an argument or discussion with the hon. member. It is my duty to decide the matter one way or the other, and it does seem to me this is more in the nature of a grievance than a matter of sufficiently urgent public importance to adjourn
Inquiries of the Ministry the regular proceedings of the house. Therefore I must reiterate the conclusion previously stated, that I do not see sufficient urgency or importance to adjourn the house under standing order 26.

On the orders of the day:


Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Secretary of State. Could he inform the house if the usual consultation took place between the C.B.C. and the advisory council on religious broadcasting with respect to "The Open Grave" program? If not, why not?


Maurice Lamontagne: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware that such consultations have taken place, but I will seek the information and reply to the hon. member.


Hon. Paul Martineau (Ponliac-Temiscamin-gue):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. Could the Secretary of State tell us whether he contacted the C.B.C. authorities recently to have that program cancelled or revised in view of the protests it stirred up all across the country?


Maurice Lamontagne: No, Mr. Speaker.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Does the Secretary of State intend to contact C.B.C. authorities on that matter before Wednesday night?


Maurice Lamontagne: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. D. V. Pugh (Okanagan Boundary):: Mr. Speaker, would the minister give the house an assurance that he will make immediate inquiries of the president of the C.B.C. into the suitability of the program "The Open Grave"?


Maurice Lamontagne: Mr. Speaker, I have already said that I intend to speak to the president of the C.B.C. about this matter.



LABOUR RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask the Prime Minister whether he has any observation to make regarding a statement made by the Secretary of State for External Affairs on Friday, to the effect that consultations have taken place with representatives of the United States administration. I understood from the statement that there was indeed an undertaking that the United States would do its part to assure that Canadian ships on the great lakes would be protected from harassment.

Inquiries of the Ministry
Would the Prime Minister say how the statement made by the Secretary of State for External Affairs is to be considered alongside a reported statement of the under secretary in Washington to the effect that there has been no consultation between the Canadian government and the United States administration, nor has any such undertaking been given?


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Well, Mr. Speaker, the reply of the Secretary of State for External Affairs, to which my right hon. friend has referred, did state that it had been made clear that the co-operation of the United States in this matter was desirable and essential, and that he had pointed this out to the United States secretary of state in discussions which he had with him.
Now, Mr. Speaker, the reply of my colleague does not seem to me to go as far as the right hon. gentleman indicated it went in his question, but it certainly would not justify the kind of statement just made in Washington, to which my right hon. friend has referred.
I can tell him, as indeed I have told the house previously, that in the difficulties of last summer in regard to the harassment of Canadian ships in United States ports on the great lakes, the United States administration did promise to co-operate in doing what it could do to bring the harassment to an end, and it did in fact co-operate in that way. I feel sure we shall get that kind of co-operation from the United States authorities again in respect to similar circumstances if those circumstances should, unhappily, occur.


Hon. Leon Balcer (Three Rivers):: A supplementary question to the Minister of Labour. Can the minister give an assurance to the house that the trustees will resist all efforts of Mr. Paul Hall to get hold of Canadian S.I.U. funds in order to take care of Hal Banks' $20,000 salary as vice president of the United States union, as guaranteed by Mr. Hall in a statement to the press?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I will be glad to draw the hon. gentleman's observations to the attention of the trustees, whom I shall be seeing later today.


Mr. Donald Maclnnis (Cape Breton South):: Is the minister not aware that the trustees have, necessarily, to sign the cheques in the event of any moneys being expended from union funds, and does he not think the trustees have complete control over any salary that Hal Banks might receive from this union?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Under the terms of the trusteeship act passed by this parliament the


trustees have control over the financial activities of the seafarers international union of Canada.


Malcolm MacInnis: This being the situation, will the minister not draw to the attention of the trustees the view that in no circumstances should Mr. Banks receive any Canadian funds in the form of salary?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. That is a statement, not a question.


Malcolm MacInnis: On a point of order, that was definitely a question, and the Minister of Labour nodded agreement. I did not make any statement; I asked a question.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister in a position to say when the Canadian troops in Cyprus will begin to carry out their duties as designated by the secretary general?


Lester Bowles Pearson: As the hon. member knows, the Canadian contingent of the United Nations peace force is in Cyprus at the present time and is carrying out certain duties. My colleague the Secretary of State for External Affairs is in Geneva at the moment, where he has been discussing with the secretary general of the United Nations questions in connection with the authority which is required by that force so that it may carry out its peace keeping duties effectively. In these discussions the Secretary of State for External Affairs has gone over the whole matter with the secretary general. He is meeting U Thant again today and will be back in the house very shortly, at which time he will be in a position to make a full report to the house on this very difficult and very delicate matter.
In the meantime I should like to remind the house that all United Nations peace keeping operations have developed largely as a result of the interpretation of a mandate to meet actual requirements. The United Nations had the same temporary difficulties that are being encountered in connection with this matter when it set up a peace force in the Suez area, and again when it set up the peace force for the Congo. Ultimately, in the case of the Congo operation-and it took longer in the Congo than I think it will take in connection with the Cyprus effort-the secretary general issued a detailed set of operational

procedures which dealt in particular with the right of self defence, and the right to shoot in self defence.
With its experience of peace keeping operations the United Nations is, I believe, well placed to judge what peace keeping methods should be applied in Cyprus, and it goes without saying that these methods will be the subject of consultation between the UN and the governments participating in the military operation. Those consultations are going on at the moment. They are going on, as far as Canada is concerned, between the secretary general and our Secretary of State for External Affairs. I understand that the secretary general will be in a position within a very few days to make a report to the security council in which some of these difficulties will be outlined and the solutions made known. We are in consultation with him at the moment with regard to this particular statement as well.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I take it, then, from the Prime Minister's statement that in the event of any hostilities breaking out in Cyprus, it would probably be United Kingdom troops which would actually be engaged rather than Canadian troops at the present time.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Well, the Canadian contingent of the United Nations force is engaged already in the sense that it has begun patrolling activities. In the event of hostilities breaking out the function, if any, which the Canadian contingent would perform would depend entirely on the nature of the hostilities.
I am sorry I cannot go into this matter in greater detail today. I wish I could. I am not trying to hold anything back from the house in connection with this important matter. However, I shall be in a much better position to make a fuller statement when I have had another opportunity of consulting with the Secretary of State for External Affairs, if indeed he is not back in the house to make a statement himself.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Is the Prime Minister in a position to make any statement on a reported incident involving a Canadian member of the peace force in Cyprus who wandered out of bounds and is said to have been shot at by guerrillas?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Again, I am not in a position to deal with that matter because I am not aware of the details. I know it has been customary for a long time for soldiers, Canadian and others, to wander out of bounds, but I am not familiar with this particular incident though I would be very glad to look into it.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: May I ask the Prime Minister whether any of the 7,000 British troops in Cyprus have been committed to the United Nations peace force, or whether they are still operating entirely under the terms of the Cyprus treaty. May I also ask the right hon. gentleman if the operational orders to which he referred will allow the United Nations peace keeping force to remove road blocks since it appears perfectly obvious that mechanized international patrols cannot very well travel over an island unless they have power to remove road blocks.


Lester Bowles Pearson: As to the first question, it is my present knowledge that no United Kingdom forces as such have been allocated to the United Nations peace keeping force but that this will be taking place very shortly, that is, in the matter of a day or two.
As far as the second question is concerned, in the absence of knowledge of the detailed instructions which are now being worked out and which will be reported to the house as soon as I am in a position to do so, I cannot, of course, reply specifically. I think, however, it would be pretty obvious that if any force is to do this job it would require authority to remove road blocks or anything of that kind which would prevent it carrying out its functions.


Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapointe):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. Can he tell the house whether the troops promised by Sweden and Ireland are on their way to Cyprus or about to proceed there to lend their support to the Canadian troops which have joined the United Nations force.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I believe I am correct in saying that an advance contingent of the Swedish force is now in Cyprus, or will be in Cyprus in a matter of hours; and that this force will be followed in a day or two if not by the whole Swedish contingent, then by part of that contingent. It is also expected that both the Finnish and the Irish troops will be there shortly.


Mr. Marcel Lessard (Lake Si. John):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence.
In view of the present situation in Cyprus, what steps have been taken for the prompt withdrawal of our troops from the island in the event of an invasion by continental Turkish and Greek forces?

Inquiries of the Ministry


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, we hope and expect that this contingency will not arise. As a matter of fact, the reason Canadian troops are in Cyprus is to do their best to make sure it does not arise.


Marcel Lessard: But should that happen, Mr. Speaker, will the government be disposed to withdraw our forces? It may happen.


Paul Theodore Hellyer: May I say again that I hope and expect that it will not, but I am sure our armed forces have demonstrated their ability to be prepared for an emergency and to carry out assignments with noteworthy efficiency and praiseworthy effectiveness.


REPORTED USE OF CANADIAN ENGINE FOR SUBVERSIVE PURPOSES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: May I answer a question which was directed by the right hon. Leader of the Opposition to my colleague the Secretary of State for External Affairs on March 20, when he said:
I should like to ask the minister whether a protest has been received from the organization of American states in connection with the report of an investigation by a committee of the organization to the effect that a motorboat engine, delivered from Montreal to Cuba last October, was used to land a large cache of arms on a beach in Venezuela for subversive purposes. If so, has any investigation been made as to why this motor was not set out in a report of the dominion bureau of statistics for 1963?
My colleague the Secretary of State for External Affairs, who is at the United Nations conference on trade and development, has informed me the answer to the first part of the question is no.
As to the second part of the question, from the description of the goods in the customs form submitted by the shipper, the coding clerk in the dominion bureau of statistics coded the shipment as "engines, turbines and parts, general purpose, not elsewhere specified". If the hon. gentleman would like to look at the classification, it is class 50029. This statistical information appears under this item in the dominion bureau of statistics publication of export statistics.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
[Stage Direction]
Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolielie-L'Assomplion-
Montcalm): Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a

question to the Prime Minister in order to find out whether he shares the views expressed by the Minister of Agriculture? According to the Globe and Mail, the minister is alleged to have said in Winnipeg:
[Stage Direction]
Mr. Hays said he opposes a Progressive Conservative suggestion of an eastern grain agency for buying feed grain for eastern farmers from the Canadian wheat board.
I ask the Prime Minister if he shares this view.
Lester Bowles Pearson: The hon. gentleman should know something about cabinet solidarity.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, after some of the devious examples of this recently I wish the Prime Minister would tell us whether the Minister of Agriculture spoke for the government when he used the words referred to by the hon. gentleman.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I have only my hon. friend's statement of a press report. The Minister of Agriculture-and I am sure all hon. members will be sorry to hear this- is not in the house-


John George Diefenbaker: When will he be back?


Lester Bowles Pearson: -because he is ill; he is confined to his bed.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I hope my hon. friends will not jeer at that, Mr. Speaker, because it happens to be accurate. I have already been in touch with him by telephone, and I will be glad to check on the authenticity of these observations.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, may I extend to the minister our best wishes for a speedy recovery.


Mr. W. H. Jorgenson (Provencher):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the Prime Minister would tell us, in view of widespread concern over a division in the cabinet on matters relating to agriculture, if he would be prepared to make the statement that was promised to the house by the Minister of Agriculture when I asked the question last Monday, so the country will know that the interests of the farmer are not entirely ignored by this government.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the country knows that the interests of the farmer will be protected by this government and the Minister of Agriculture, and that no such reassurance is required.


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: May I ask the Prime Minister-


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: I listened to the hon. member's supplementary question, and it seemed to me he received a complete answer.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether I may ask a further question. The Canadian Press reports from Winnipeg as follows:
Mr. Hays, speaking in a press conference, said most of the pressure was coming from Quebec members and this pressure had forced Prime Minister Pearson to appoint a minister from Quebec to look after the question of feed grains.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


John George Diefenbaker: I continue:
Mr. Hays said half the feed grains from western Canada go to Quebec and the appointment was caused by "a political problem".
Is that correct?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, as my right hon. friend used to remind us so often when we sat on that side of the house, it is against the rules of the house to be asked to comment on the accuracy of press reports. But if he breaks the rules, I do not mind cooperating in a desire to set his curiosity at rest. I shall be very glad to look into that particular press report.


Mr. Pigeon:: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. Since an important delegation of farmers from Joliette wants to organize a march on Ottawa to support the catholic farmers union's meeting with the Minister of Agriculture on dairy problems, does the Prime Minister intend to enter into communication with his Minister of Agriculture through the Telstar, to advise him to be in attendance in Ottawa to receive this delegation?


David Vaughan Pugh: have a supplementary question for the Prime Minister, Mr. Speaker. In view of statements made as to who is running agriculture, I should like to know who, in this troika, has the veto.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear who is running agriculture in this cabinet-


An hon. Member:: Nobody.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Lester Bowles Pearson: -and it is also quite clear that it is not the former minister of agriculture, who is now in Peking.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.



LEGALITY OF ACTIONS DURING TRANSFER OF DUTIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Terry Nugent (Edmonton-Strathcona):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister. Some time ago the Prime Minister indicated that he would be dealing with the question of the cabinet changes and the point I raised about the legality of the action of the government from the 3rd to the 20th of February in the Department of Agriculture. In view of the pending recess, would the Prime Minister assure the house now that the statement he has prepared in that regard will be made early enough to give all members a chance to join in the discussion which will certainly take place on the illegality of the action taken?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I would have been glad to be able to make that statement last Monday, but this item was not reached in the consideration of the supplementary estimates. As soon as it is reached I will be glad to make a statement. It was not reached because hon. gentlemen opposite spent the afternoon discussing the item in the estimates which had been under discussion when the house adjourned on the Friday before, but as soon as it is reached I will be glad to make a statement, and I hope there will be ample opportunity for my hon. friend and others to comment on it.


Terence James (Terry) Nugent: A supplementary question. Do I take it that the Prime Minister is not going to go out of his way to make any special arrangements to make sure there will be a chance to discuss this important question before Easter, having in mind that the whole country is worrying about what is going on in the cabinet?


Lester Bowles Pearson: If my hon. friend wants me to interrupt the business of the house to bring forward this particular item, that can be considered; but I see no necessity for doing so when after the budget debate is adjourned we will proceed with supplementary estimates and interim supply. There will be ample opportunity then. If we do not get interim supply through we will have to reconvene next week instead of having a holiday.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, in that connection may I make the suggestion that the next item of business after the budget debate

Inquiries of the Ministry is adjourned should he interim supply rather than going ahead with the supplementary estimates. Interim supply certainly requires attention, but I would point out that we intend to discuss the supplementary estimates, and any threat that we may be called back earlier will not divert us one bit.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I think the proper order of business would be that following the adjournment of the budget debate we go on with the supplementary estimates, and as soon as they are passed then take interim supply. I hope we will then be able to adjourn for Easter week.


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, since we are discussing the order of business for this week may I ask the Prime Minister a question. It is based on the hope he expressed last Monday and again last Tuesday that second reading of the Canada pension plan bill would be proceeded with before Easter. May I ask him what has happened to that hope?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I expressed that hope and I still have hope, Mr. Speaker, but the realization of that hope depends on how we deal with the other business before the house which is now under consideration.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Veterans Affairs whether he has agreed to the very urgent request of the Royal Canadian Legion that he discontinue immediately all action on the proposed handover of D.V.A. treatment facilities to other levels of government.


Hon. Roger Teillei (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I have not yet replied to the request that was made and the letter I received, but I do not accept the hon. gentleman's interpretation of it.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I used their exact words; I was not interpreting anything.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: I would simply like to point out, Mr. Speaker, that the points raised by the Royal Canadian Legion will be taken into account, as I have stated before, when any case is taken into consideration, and it will be handled on its merits in the light of these representations.


Mr. C. S. Smallwood (Bafile River-Cam-rose):: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, which I should like to direct to the

Minister of Veterans Affairs. Has the minister received telegrams from the Canadian Legion in Alberta; and if so, what action has he taken?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: Mr. Speaker, I think this is the question that was asked on Friday, and I answered the second part of the question-


Clifford Silas Smallwood: No, it was not; I have not asked the question before.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: -and said I had received such telegrams and they are being taken into consideration. I answered the second part of that question then and said that as no decision had been taken with regard to any specific hospital, there was no question of change. I should apologize to the hon. member for New Westminster, I believe it was, in connection with my reply to a question last Friday with regard to the Victoria and Shaughnessy hospitals. I should have mentioned that he had sent me notice of that same question, and the reply I then gave applies.


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, because of the concern of veterans organizations with regard to the policy announced by the minister, and the need for and importance of consultation with the dominion commands of these veterans organizations, would the minister defer any action in connection with this policy until the matter has been referred to the standing committee on veterans affairs?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: I have already answered that question in the house, Mr. Speaker.



PUBLICATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. M. Fisher (Pori Arthur):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask the Prime Minister a question relating to the proposed legislation to assist Canadian periodicals. Is the Prime Minister at the present time considering what is called a free vote and a free debate on this issue in so far as his own members are concerned, or that part of it dealing with Time and Reader's Digest?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker, that matter has not been considered.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. D. S. Harkness (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to

the Minister of National Defence. Is the minister going to issue his white paper on defence before the Easter recess; and if so, when?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: I hope so, Mr. Speaker; and if it is possible, it will be getting fairly close to the recess, I am afraid.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Speaker, in the light of the oft repeated hope of the Minister of National Defence that he will soon publish a white paper, can he assure the house that substantial portions of that paper have not already been leaked, having in mind press reports which are so detailed that they are more than speculative?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: Mr. Speaker, all I can say is that as far as I am concerned the paper has not been leaked. There have been a number of speculative stories that have attempted to guess in advance some of the things that may be contained in the paper. I am afraid I cannot give my friend any information as to their accuracy or otherwise until the paper is produced, which I hope will be very shortly.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is the minister in a position to say that senior officials of his department have not discussed the contents of this white paper, in the light of reports of discussions with senior officials of his department about the proposed contents of the paper?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: I am sure that the senior officials of my department have not been discussing the contents of the white paper in detail. I am sure, on the other hand, that there are many people in the Department of National Defence discussing what they think is in the white paper, because it has been a topic of quite lively conversation there for some time.



NORTHERN AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. W. Prittie (Burnaby-Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources whether he has any further statement to make concerning the Norwegian polar expedition, about which there were some news reports recently.


Arthur Laing: Mr. Speaker, this concerns the Staib expedition to the north pole. I want to say that the government
Inquiries of the Ministry of Canada, and especially my own department, have co-operated in every possible manner with this expedition, first because it involved the citizens of a friendly power, and second because we are interested in any information that can be obtained in respect of the north.
The latest news we have is that the expedition staged out of Alert, where of course we have some security considerations, went only some 12 miles and had returned to Alert. They had intended to use Ward Hunt island as a base, which is about 100 miles west of Alert, but found the going too rough and decided to sally forth from Alert. They have now returned to Alert and intend, I think, to use Eskimo sledges in their next attempt. But I have further, very much more serious news, in that their chief radio operator, a man by the name of Thorstein Raaby -who I believed was one of the heroes of the Kon-Tiki expedition-died yesterday of a presumed heart attack, and an inquest will be held at Alert as soon as possible.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Can the minister assure the house that Canada has established her claim to sovereign rights over all the Arctic islands, and that this is unquestioned by any other nation?


Arthur Laing: Mr. Speaker, I do not think this is at all related to the question asked by the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond. I think it is an entirely different matter and could be asked on a different occasion.



CANADIAN CENTENNIAL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Guy Marcoux: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State. The urgency of the matter is clear since the statement was made over the week end. It is also a matter of national character, since it refers to works to be undertaken in connection with the celebration of the centenary of confederation.
Will the Secretary of State see to it that the Quebec government does not resort to patronage in awarding contracts for works in connection with the centenary of confederation?
In fact, it is provided in one of the clauses of the agreement that:
The minister can however allow tenders to be asked privately to a limited number of efficient and solvent contractors. The number must not be less than three if the tender is below $500,000 and not less than five when it reaches or is over that amount.

Inquiries of the Ministry
Since clause 16 is inconsistent with clause 15 which provides that public tenders will be called, I would like to ask the minister whether he will prevent the Liberal government of Quebec from resorting to patronage with funds allotted for the works of the centennial of confederation, a third of which comes from the federal government?


Maurice Lamontagne: Mr. Speaker, to my knowledge, the provincial government has no intention of using the centennial project for patronage purposes. Anyhow, the provincial government is entirely responsible for the regulations it sets up as regards this project.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jean-Pierre Cote (Longueuil):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Labour. May I ask the minister whether the period for the winter house building program will be extended after March 31 on account of the shortage of materials and the lack of workers which delayed the completion of a large percentage of houses?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, the national house builders met with me today and put forward the view that completion of certain houses under this program has been held up owing to shortage of certain classes of tradesmen at various stages of the program. This whole question is now under consideration to ascertain the full facts and with the possible view of extending some relief in this situation.



EMPLOYMENT OF HOUSE STAFF DURING EASTER RECESS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr.   Gerard. Laprise@Chapleau: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to put a question to the leader of the house, but in his absence, I shall direct it to the Prime Minister.
Could the Prime Minister publish a notice showing the holidays of secretaries and other employees of parliament during the Easter recess?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I thought it had already been indicated to the house that it is our hope and intention to adjourn Thursday evening


and resume our session on April 6. There is one reservation to that, of course, and that is on the understanding that interim supply is passed by the house.


Gordon Minto Churchill: No, you did not say that the other day.


Mr. Laprise:: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I think that the Prime Minister misunderstood my question. I am not referring to members of the house, but to secretaries and other employees of parliament. [Text]


Lester Bowles Pearson: Well, I think this is a matter for Your Honour, and I am sure you will be glad to look into it.



WORLD FAIR


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. L. P. Antoine Belanger (Charlevoix):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Could he tell me whether he is aware of the fact that a sketch for an emblem representing the theme "Man's World", copy of which was included with my notice, was submitted for approval to the 1967 World Fair Corporation? That sketch was made by Mr. Philippe E. Maltais, La Malbaie artist.
If the minister is aware of that, could he tell the house (a) whether that sketch was taken into consideration; (b) why was it not adopted instead of the one rejected by this house?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. This is a question for the order paper.


Mr. Barry Mather (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question I should like to direct to the Prime Minister. I understood the Prime Minister to undertake last week to look into the matter of the world fair directors adopting a controversial symbol for the fair in defiance of parliament. I wonder whether he has any statement to make.


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker. When I got to my office this morning I inquired whether the report which I had requested had arrived. It has not, but I am told it will probably arrive today, in which case I will be able to make a statement tomorrow.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gene Rheaume (Northwest Territories):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Labour and stems from some 70 telegrams which have come to me today from all parts of the Arctic, sent by Canadian workingmen employed on the distant early warning line. Will the minister take immediate action to insist that the United States Federal Electric Corporation respect the decision of the Canada labour relations board and the court of Queen's bench of Manitoba that these men be allowed to have as their bargaining agent the I.B.E.W.?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, I have also received telegrams, or at least one telegram, this morning and the officers of the Department of Labour are conducting an investigation into the matter.


Eugène (Gene) Rhéaume: A supplementary question. Will the minister, at the same time he is investigating this matter, look into whether or not an agreement was signed between Washington and Ottawa whereby the rights of these men to bargain collectively were suspended?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Yes, Mr. Speaker.



CROWN ASSETS


[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 Defence Production in relation to the closing of a section of the mid-Canada line on March 31, and in view of the fact that the heating of the buildings at Cranberry Portage, Manitoba, was discontinued last week. Will the minister look into this matter immediately in order to preserve these buildings for some useful purpose?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member for Churchill is already aware that a representative of the area development agency is now in Manitoba examining into this particular question.


Robert Simpson: A supplementary question. I understand that the representative was there, but nothing was decided upon with regard to the heating of these buildings.
Inquiries of the Ministry TRANSPORT



NEW FREIGHT FERRY, NORTH SYDNEY-PORT AUX BASQUES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Robert Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Transport. In view of the minister's announcement at a meeting at North Sydney during his visit there that a new freight ferry would be put into service between North Sydney and Port aux Basques, and in view of his announcement to the press after the meeting that it would carry loaded railway freight cars, does this mean that the railway in Newfoundland is to be standardized?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I do not think that that would be a correct inference to draw.


Robert Muir: May I ask the minister what effect the operation of this railway freight car ferry between the points I mentioned will have on the employment of stevedores at the port of North Sydney?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, since the tenders have not yet been called for this ferry, and since it will take some time for it to be built, I think there will be plenty of opportunity to inquire into all the aspects of its effects long before it goes into service; and I am sorry to say that this is, as the hon. member knows, a matter of years.


Robert Muir: Is the minister aware that it has been suggested that employment will be reduced by 75 per cent? So it is not too early to start investigating the problem now.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Experience has been that traffic has grown so much since confederation that employment is always going up, and this is likely to continue if we improve the communications between Newfoundland and the rest of the country.



PENSIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Marcel Lessard: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct to the Prime Minister a question of which I gave him notice.
Has he received recently indications to the effect that the government of Mr. Lesage intended to withdraw its pension plan proposal in order to join the program introduced by the federal government, following the last changes made to it?
1360	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker.



URANIUM


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. A. Webb (Hastings-Fronienac):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Since the contracts for uranium are nearing completion, what steps is the government taking for renewal of those contracts, which would ease the anxiety of thousands of citizens in the Bancroft area?


Mitchell William Sharp: Representations have been received by me and by several members of the government for renewal of these contracts. These representations are being studied.



COLUMBIA RIVER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stuart A. Fleming (Okanagan-Revel-stoke):: Will the Minister of Finance explain the $54 million difference between the $220 million to be borrowed for payment to British Columbia for downstream benefits, as stated in his budget speech, and the $274 million provided for in the Columbia river treaty protocol?


Hon. Walter L. Gordon (Minister of Finance):: I should like to reserve the right to add to this explanation, but I think the difference will be used by the British Columbia government to repay certain debts in the United States.


Stuart A. Fleming: Does this mean that this lump sum payment will not be invested in a reserve fund to be used exclusively for Columbia river construction purposes?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: It or its equivalent will be, Mr. Speaker.


David Vaughan Pugh: May
I ask a supplementary question. What measures is this government taking to safeguard the rest of the fund?


Stuart A. Fleming: From raiding.



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State who, I believe, answers in the house for the civil service commission. In view of the government's recent proposed amendment to the citizenship act, will the Secretary of State request the civil service commission to remove or modify certain questions in its application for employment form which, by implication, discriminate against naturalized Canadians? I refer to questions 19 and 20 on page 1 of the application form and the series of questions in this regard on page 3 of the form.


Maurice Lamontagne: I will refer this matter to the civil service commission and give an answer to the hon. member later.



AUTOMOBILE PARTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce whether he has received any complaints from Canadian exporters with regard to the refusal of automobile companies in Canada which are subsidiaries of United States automobile manufacturers to supply automotive parts for export to China. I should like to ask the minister if this refusal is based upon the declared policy of the United States government, and if so does the minister consider this action to be a violation of Canada's right to exercise control over its own economy?


Mitchell William Sharp: The hon. gentleman was good enough to send me notice of this question. Personally I have not received any complaints, but before answering the question I have sent out some inquiries to my colleagues, and I shall answer the whole of his question tomorrow.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I may tell the minister that I have seen a copy of a reply from his office, and may I ask him if he will look again and make sure whether he has received a letter?


Mitchell William Sharp: This was one of the reasons I was a little hesitant about answering at all. It may be that there is a complaint that has escaped the attention of my officials. However, I shall answer this question tomorrow.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: May I direct a question to the Prime Minister arising out of the declaration made by a representative of the U.S.S.R. on Saturday that the Soviet union will never pay its assessment to the United Nations for the Congo and Middle East forces, and that any challenge to its right to vote in the general assembly on that account may break up the United Nations. In view of this statement of defiance of the United Nations, and the responsibilities assumed by the U.S.S.R., and the declaration of the international court of justice that these peace keeping costs should be borne by the membership, what is the attitude of Canada in this regard?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I read this report, and I share my right hon. friend's concern over it. Perhaps I could make a very short statement on the matter.
As the house is aware from previous reports that have been made to it, effective January 1, 1964, the Soviet union and a number of other member states of the United Nations became vulnerable to the application of article 19 of the charter, mainly through their failure to pay their assessed share of peace keeping costs of the United Nations. The application of this article, which provides for the loss of voting in the general assembly for members whose payments are in such arrears, will take effect when the general assembly next meets unless steps have been taken to liquidate the arrears.
The Soviet statement to which my hon. friend has referred is a further indication of the Soviet union's refusal to contribute to the financing of peace keeping operations. This manoeuvring for position, and that is what it is, in relation to a most important issue in the United Nations is being studied very closely by the government because of its implications for future effectiveness of the United Nations and the discussion of proposals for the financing of peace keeping operations, and also because of the position that will arise at the United Nations assembly when it may be necessary to apply-and it is a very serious step to take-this particular article to the Soviet union and other members of the United Nations who are in arrears.


John George Diefenbaker: I share with the Prime Minister his feelings in this regard. I should like to know from him what is the attitude of the Canadian government in connection with this matter. Can any member of the
Inquiries of the Ministry United Nations, by unilateral action, refuse to be bound by its pledged agreement? If so, this would place the United Nations in a position of division as between those who will assume their responsibilities and those who will not, which would result in a complete negation of the charter and the agreements that have been entered into. What representations has the government of Canada, as a middle power within the United Nations, made to the U.S.S.R. in this connection? Because unless there is action taken the United Nations will be a caricature of what otherwise it would have been.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, for some time now we have been exchanging views with some of our friends in the United Nations as to what action should be taken in the circumstances which may arise and to which my right hon. friend has made reference. It seems to me that no member of the United Nations, particularly a member which enjoys permanent representation on the security council, with a veto, should be exempted from the obligations of the charter in this particular matter, and that there should be no discrimination in favour of any member of the United Nations.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the Prime Minister if the Canadian delegation to the United Nations assembly when it meets will be instructed by the government to urge that all delinquent nations including the Soviet union and France, both of whom I understand are delinquent, or any other nation that is delinquent, be required to live up to the terms of article 19?


Lester Bowles Pearson: We will be very glad indeed to do that. Not only the Soviet union but other members of the United Nations are in default in this particular case, and all members should live up to their obligations in this respect.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE INQUIRY AS TO REPRESENTATION OF YUKON AND NORTHWEST TERRITORIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Erik Nielsen (Yukon):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister in relation to the forthcoming federal-provincial conference later this month. Has he yet received replies to the letters he sent to the provincial premiers? If so, is there a likelihood that the governments of the Yukon and the Northwest Territories will be represented at this conference?

The Budget-Mr. J. H. Horner
Right Hon. L. 3. Pearson (Prime Minister):
Mr. Speaker, the majority of the provinces which dealt with this particular matter in their replies felt that there should be no interruption of the procedure followed in the past, under which the territories are represented by the federal delegation.



THE BUDGET


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Friday, March 20, consideration of the motion of Hon. Walter L. Gordon (Minister of Finance) that Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair for the house to go into committee of ways and means, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Nowlan.
Mr. J. H. Horner (Acadia):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in the budget debate one naturally thinks of last year's budget, which the minister termed a face the facts budget. He had no name at all for this budget, and I think that was very appropriate. However, if one looked for a name one might call it a do nothing budget. Many people have hung different phrases on it, but I rather like the description put on it by the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Thompson), "a thin sandwich with very little meat in it". I wonder how his party will vote when their turn comes to declare whether or not they support the budget. I suppose they will think that a thin sandwich is better than none.
When one thinks of last year's budget and this year's budget from the point of view of their effect on the economy of Canada, one finds many surprising things. I immediately think of the increase in our total debt. No one minds going in debt if they are accomplishing something by doing so. Last year's budget caused an increase in the per capita national debt of 4.2 per cent. Yet my hon. friends of the Social Credit party, who so often tell us about the dangers of going into debt, voted for it. This year's budget will bring about an increase in the total amount of Canada's debt larger than in any other year going back nearly as far as the war years. There will be an increase of over $1 billion in the total national debt in 1963-64 brought about by this budget. Yet the Social Crediters will probably vote for this highest increase in the per capita debt in Canada going back as far as 1954.
In 1954 per capita debt in Canada was something like $727. In 1955 it was cut to $717, and we reduced it to a little over $600 in 1960. In 1963 it was $736, but this coming year it will rise to $789, an increase of $50 for each Canadian. Yet my friends, the Social

Crediters from Alberta, who hate debt and talk against debt, will in all likelihood vote for this huge increase.
One can only take from this that they talk one thing and vote another. They have become so degenerate with this procedure of talking one way and voting another that they are very two-faced, to say the least. Two weeks ago in this house they voted against an amendment which we introduced during the debate on the throne speech, to provide family allowances up until the age of 18 years, but when the final vote is taken on the budget they will probably vote in favour of extending the age limit.
This perhaps points out that an erosion of democracy is setting in, particularly in that party. When people vote one way and then the opposite way, all within a two week period, one must realize there is great danger when they value their vote so lightly. This is an erosion of the very democracy in which we participate.
We on this side of the house are not afraid to borrow money and have budget deficits, so long as those deficits go to the building of the country and to improving its economy. During our term in office we built dams, vocational schools, the Pine Point railroad, power projects, helped shipbuilding and provided roads to resources in the north. We also paid more to the provinces on a very equitable basis. If anyone doubts that, let him look at the report of the recent federal-provincial conference where the tables show that between 1956 and 1963 amounts paid by the federal government to the provinces increased threefold. In 1956 the provinces received something like $600 million and in 1962-63 they received nearly $2 billion from the federal government.
Anyone can talk about deficits, but if he examines how the money was spent he would not mind borrowing money used to develop the country and to give the provinces a greater share in participating in its development. In the present budget we see an increase in taxes with another huge deficit, and we wonder what the government is doing with the money. For one thing it has been increasing salaries all around. The top echelons in the C.B.C., civil service and the armed forces have all received tremendous pay increases but the lower echelons have received very little.
One may well ask where the present buoyancy of the economy came from, but if we look at the Bank of Canada's report for 1963 we find this statement on page 7:
The over-all performance of the Canadian economy in 1963 was encouraging. Substantial increases in output and employment were achieved for a third consecutive year-

I emphasize those words "third consecutive year." It goes on to say:
Further gains were made by Canadian manufactured goods in 1963 both in export markets and in competition with imports in the Canadian market-
Why was this the third consecutive year of improvement? The report goes on to give the reason as directly because of the devaluation of the dollar.
One development that has contributed a great deal to the Canadian economy's performance in recent years has been the improvement in Canada's international competitive position. This was greatly strengthened by the decline in the foreign exchange value of the Canadian dollar in 1960-62, and as Canadian prices and costs have risen only modestly since, this advantage has been largely retained.
Certainly here is an unbiased, unpolitical, factual report on the economy of Canada which shows why our economy has remained strong for the last three years. But we must remember that all is not clear and that dangers do arise. We must maintain this position. In other words we cannot have the cost of living increasing to the point where it will eventually erode the advantages we have obtained by the devaluation of the dollar.
At page 8 the Bank of Canada report goes on to say:
At the same time the competitive position of a number of important trading countries, notably the countries of western Europe, has been weakened by the strong upward pressure on costs and prices that they have been experiencing.
In other words, we can only retain the advantages we have received from the devaluation of the dollar if we safeguard and are ever watchful of our cost of living and see to it that costs of production do not rise too far.
Further on in the report, dealing with economic developments in Canada, it says:
Average output per person employed in the non-farm sector of the economy increased by approximately 1 per cent, somewhat less than in 1962.
In other words there already is some slight eroding of the situation which followed devaluation of the dollar, and we must look to the budget for some efforts to stop this erosion. We have had a strong economy for three years because of the devaluation of the dollar, and particularly in 1963 because of the huge wheat sales. The Bank of Canada report makes reference to those wheat sales, saying they helped our foreign exchange position immensely and without them we would be in dire trouble.
As a matter of fact the Minister of Finance made some reference to this in his budget speech, but I can think back to the time when we initiated huge wheat sales to communist
The Budget-Mr. J. H. Horner China. We were condemned from various sides of the house. The hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Thompson), and his colleague the hon. member for Medicine Hat (Mr. Olson)- though I am not sure if he is still his colleague because that party has broken up so much- said we should not be selling to the communists. The present Prime Minister said it looked terrible, cash to our friends and credit to our enemies. That is what he said when we initiated the policy of selling wheat to communist countries.
He sneered at it, but he and his colleagues are not sneering now. It was their life saver in 1963, and they admit it. It was their life saver in foreign exchange. It was their life saver in trade. It was their life saver for the whole economy of the country. I looked for something in the budget which would indicate that they intended to add to the continuity of their own life saver. I looked for measures intended to help the western economy. There was nothing. While the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) was reading his budget speech, I interjected: "Nothing for the farmers", and he replied, "Yes, they have children, too". No doubt the concessions with regard to education will benefit many people. But we were looking for something which would bring solid benefit to the economy as a whole.
I have here an article which appeared in the Financial Post of March 14 under the heading: "Behind the Big West Coast Grain Back-up". What is behind it? We know that because of a shortage of facilities on the west coast Canada lost the sale of 118 million bushels of wheat. I looked for something in the budget to show that the federal government was aware of this problem and that it planned to spend so many millions of dollars to improve harbour facilities out there. Again, I saw nothing to this effect. The article in the Financial Post of March 14 says the reason for the grain back-up on the west coast is the fact that facilities are inadequate and outmoded; they need improvement and extension and it is suggested that $20 million would do the job. Nevertheless, this government failed to recognize the ever increasing need for improved port facilities to handle the requirements of a trading nation such as ours. Hon. members opposite talk of foreign exchange; they talk about the need for trade. But they do very little about these things and the budget itself did absolutely nothing in this regard.
We heard the Liberals in western Canada spout off for years advocating the theory of free trade in this country. They said free trade was the answer to all our problems. When the former prime minister, my hon. friend from Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker) told Great Britain she must honour Canada's

The Budget-Mr. J. H. Horner
rights to trade with her before she entered the European common market, he was criticized and told this was not the proper attitude to take. But what about the attitude now being taken by those who sit on the treasury benches? I have here an article from the Ottawa Journal of March 17, 1964, which says:
Tariff board recommendations on oilfield equipment have been worked into the customs tariff and there is an upward trend in protection for Canadian producers of machinery and parts.
Note the words "an upward trend in protection". I am not against this, but here you have a party which for years has advocated free trade. The world has grown smaller, they said, and free trade is inevitable. It would be rough on certain industries in this country, but we had to face up to competition the world over. That was what they said for so many years. However, a different tune is being played today by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) and by his colleague the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Sharp).
The former minister of agriculture the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Hamilton) was criticized with regard to the wheat sales. He was criticized for telling farmers in western Canada a year ago to grow all the wheat they could because he had found markets for that wheat. The present Minister of Trade and Commerce has yet to advise the farmers as to the size of the market he can foresee for the future. The seeding season is not far away. I am sure many farmers wonder what they should be planting. But no advice comes from the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) probably because he does not know whether this matter comes within his jurisdiction; he is in a quandary and we in western Canada cannot blame him. The Minister of Trade and Commerce could at least come out and make his statement and let us judge how close he comes in his prediction.
We see very little in this budget. The minister told us, in his speech, about the importance of tourism and the beneficial effect of receipts from tourism on our balance of payments figures. Why has there been this improvement? It is the consequence of the devaluation of the dollar. This is the same dollar that was derided by hon. members opposite when it was introduced. They derided it and called it a Diefendollar, and so on. Today they are forced to recognize that it has been their life saver, along with huge sales of wheat. We looked in this budget for something for agriculture. We even looked at the last budget again to see whether there was something in it that we had

missed. In this connection let me read a paragraph from the Globe and Mail of June
15	which said, about that performance:
There are no worth-while tax cuts, no incentives
to stimulate growth and employment. The budget confesses its dismal failure in this direction by forecasting a gain of only 5 per cent in the gross national product this year, compared to the 8 per cent achieved last year by the much despised Conservatives.
We wondered what the minister would predict for this year. He said it was 5 per cent last year because of the heavy grain crops in western Canada. He said there would turn out to be an increase in the gross national product of nearly 6 per cent in 1963 because of fortunate growing conditions in western Canada. Well, in 1962 there was an increase of 8 per cent. In 1963 it was close to 6 per cent. And in 1964, the hon. gentleman says, it should be 5 per cent. Are we not moving in the wrong direction? Eight, six, five-where are we going? Is it to be four, three, two, and one by 1970? I maintain we must look forward to the future with greater optimism than this. We must bring about conditions which will create a greater growth in our gross national product than appears likely from the sliding scale which is set before us today.
We had been curious about the present budget. Well, it came, and the newspapers wrote it up. I have some comments here from one of them, the Ottawa Journal, under the headings "Little to Cheer (or Jeer) About", "Students Take the Plums", and so on. It is true there were noteworthy measures for the benefit of students and I was pleased to see them. I was glad to see that eligibility for family allowances is to be extended. But these are small matters compared with the over-all economy of the country. There was very little, if anything, in the budget for labour. There was nothing in the budget for the average businessman, nothing for the farmer. This was a dismal budget, to say the least.
We had heard a great deal about defence costs. We had heard that the minister of defence was slashing this and slashing that in an effort to pare down defence spending. Yet there turned out to be an increase in this department. Then we were told that the paring down of defence costs had yet to come. I notice, however, that it is planned to buy
16	Hercules transport planes made in the United States. We are also buying personnel carriers all of which have been manufactured in the United States. How will measures such as these strengthen our economy? We are told, of course, that defence sharing arrangements will be worked out later. But how can they be worked out when we are paring costs all round? It is the intention to build a highly mobile force, and I am in

agreement with that proposition. But I am also here to watch over the development o f our country as a whole, and the field of defence production has been one of the vital areas in which a government can act. It is true the previous government bought planes from the United States, but we had aircraft manufactured in Canada, too. Certainly this will add nothing to the economy of this country.
We looked for tax cuts in building, and we saw none. The minister said these cuts were not needed, that building had gone on anyway. Well, if we had not had the large grain sales, and if there had not been such large grain crops, our gross national product would have probably increased by less than 5 per cent.


An hon. Member:: Much less than 5 per cent.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Yes, much less than 5 per cent. So when you look at it in its true light, without the bountiful crops that western Canada enjoyed last year our increase in gross national product would have been quite a bit less than 5 per cent. Therefore can one truthfully say that the building tax is here to stay and should be here to stay? I do not think so; it should not be here. Yet my Liberal friends over there say, "Oh, this is a tremendous budget; we are cutting the deficit by one third". It is easy to cut a deficit by one third if you increase taxes by the same amount, and this is what they have done, with the building tax. They will receive nearly $200 million more each year, and this is what they are predicting will be the cut in the deficit. I use the word "predicting" because we are well aware of the fact that supplementary estimates are presented to parliament and budget predictions are often somewhat out. The minister-


Mr. Winkler:: Tricky bookkeeping.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: -has no record of performance that enables him to boast about budget predictions. He was certainly out a great deal a year ago, and I see no reason to believe that he will not be out this year. Last year's budget tried to bring in many changes. Most of them were retreated from throughout the month following the bringing down of the budget. In this budget we see further retreat with regard to the withholding tax; the minister is not going to implement the increase in this tax. Certainly one can only take from this that American pressures have been brought to bear and the minister has now seen the light in the American way and has decided not to bring about the further increase in the withholding tax.
23, 1984	1365
The Budget-Mr. J. H. Horner
Certainly if we are to continue to compete with the United States, we must bring our taxes into line with theirs. We see that the United States are lowering income tax, but we see an increase in this country. I would have liked to see some incentives to industry in the budget, something to maintain the cost of living, instead of causing an increase in the cost of living as the building tax has done. There should have been included in the budget something to ensure that we will continue to receive value for our dollar.
Some time ago there was a great deal of talk about federal co-operativism. What does it mean? We have seen an early budget brought down to place clearly on record what the federal government wants to do before the federal-provincial conference meets. Is this a new style of federal co-operativism? Certainly the provinces will not agree with it, and we can hardly blame them. We see the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) today saying, "Oh, just give us time. We will do this before Easter; we will do that before Easter". No one asked for the budget to be brought down before Easter. The pension plan could have been brought in; we could have had a six-day debate on it and passed it before Easter, if the Prime Minister had withheld the budget until after Easter. There was nothing in the budget which made it necessary to bring it down before Easter. We could have had the question of agriculture debated fully before Easter in these six days. We could have debated who is responsible, who is not responsible and who should be responsible for the various sections of that very important department. We heard some talk about two ministers being appointed. Instead of appointing two ministers, they have decided to take all the authority away from the one they did appoint.


Mr. Macaluso:: You had better read the papers before you talk like that.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I hear some quips from over there, Mr. Speaker. Apparently the backbenchers of the Liberal party are not aware of the fact that for 17 days we did not have a Minister of Agriculture.


Some hon. Members:: Shame.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: This is a great shame, in a country that was founded on agriculture, which is still the basic industry of the country.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: It certainly showed very little consideration on the part of the Prime Minister or the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) for the very basic industry that bailed them out this year with regard to
1366	HOUSE OF
The Budget-Mr. Caouette foreign exchange. They took away the minister of this department, and certainly showed very little regard and respect for that prominent department. We on this side of the house wonder who is responsible today for the various sections of the department; who is responsible for ARDA, which certainly can play such a prominent part in my constituency in the years ahead.


An hon. Member:: It might be the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Miss La-Marsh).


John (Jack) Henry Horner: It might well be. Who is responsible for farm credit? We brought in the Farm Credit Corporation. We transferred the old farm loan board, which used to be under the minister of finance, and to make it workable put it under the Department of Agriculture. Now where is it going; or should I say, where has it gone? No one knows for sure. We wonder about the stabilization board. We wonder about the eastern feed grain board.


An hon. Member:: Auctioned off.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Are they being auctioned off, and is Harry the highest bidder? That is the question. I would like to see the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) back in the house at the earliest possible date, because I know that if he needs any help in his bidding there are many members here from western Canada who are prepared to bid briskly on many of these branches of the department.
Mr. Speaker, one could speak on many subjects in this budget debate. One could go on for some time about agriculture. However, I do not think there is really anything to be gained until we know who is responsible for this department or whether the Liberals have thrown it out altogether. I have outlined some of my fears with regard to the budget. While it may not have been ill-conceived by experts, it was certainly conceived by no one and was brought in in haste for no good cause.


Mr. Real Caoueiie (Villeneuve):: Mr. Speaker, before going any further, I should like to introduce the following amendment to the amendment:
I move, seconded by the hon. member for Compton-Frontenac (Mr. Latulippe):
That all the words in the amendment after "any effective action to" be deleted and replaced by: "reduce the national defence budget, so that family allowances could be adjusted to the cost of living index."
You will note that we have been insisting strongly, since the beginning of this session, on such an adjustment of family allowances
[Mr. Horner (Acadia) .1

to the cost of living index. Indeed if the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) is able to require of the Canadian people that they pay $1 billion 35 million interest on the national debt alone for the service of the debt, we consider that the same amount, without the creation of any more money in Canada, would enable him to raise family allowances to $22 for each Canadian child.
I have no intention of repeating the remarks made by the spokesmen of other political parties during this debate. As did the Minister of Finance, they all remained true to the most orthodox principles. No one dared to get away from the beaten track of a system poisonous to all Canadians and which deprives them of a sounder economic life.
Personally, I intend to stray off the beaten path and refrain from repeating those hollow formulas handed to us each year with the white paper on the economic health of this country and the budget set down by the government.
We, of the Ralliement Creditistes, for instance, disagree completely with the Minister of Finance. As a matter of fact, we do not accept one of the first comments he made in his budget speech when he defined what he called the first goal of the Canadian government:

Our first goal is high level employment, the highest we can expect to reach and maintain:

We, of the Ralliement Creditistes, feel that that should not be the first objective of the federal government.
We believe that the chief aim of economic activity should not be to provide jobs but to meet consumer needs.
This is what Jean Daujat, a great French sociologist wrote in his book "Reponses chre-tiennes a des problemes d'aujourd'hui":
The purpose of economic activity is not to provide jobs but to ensure the welfare of the family and of its members, that is the welfare of consumers.
After the economist manner, we would say with Rev. Father Georges-Henri Levesque, former director of the social science faculty at Laval University, in Quebec city:
Economic activities are intended for the benefit of all consumers. Consumers first and foremost. Such should be the principle of any social and truly human policy.
In 1960, the assembly of the United churches of Scotland asked a group of economists, theologians and sociologists to make a survey of the present financial structure in relation to Christian doctrine.
The committee report was made public in 1962 after being presented to the general

assembly of the United churches in Dundee, Scotland, on May 10, 1962. Later on, it was published under the title "Money, a Christian View", with a foreword by Right Rev. George F. MacLeod, former moderator of the general assembly of the Church of Scotland.
Unanimously, the authors of the report stated on page 11:

There has grown the idea that any employment is better than none and that the primary object of an economic system is to provide employment. We believe that the object of production is consumption and that while human employment is generally a necessary part of the process directed to this end it must not take precedence over it. From a Christian point of view it is wrong that a man must be employed on work that can be done by a machine-
-as we see today right across Canada.

Is the government the least concerned about the consumers' interests? Is the government taking steps to assure the distribution of goods produced to all consumers so as to give them a fair subsistence and decent living conditions? Is the government taking the means to remove financial obstacles that prevent the goods and services produced by Canadians from fully meeting the needs of Canadian consumers?
We must answer in the negative to all these questions.
But why? Why are Canadian consumers, Canadian families deprived of goods and services made available by our natural resources, our industries and workers and displayed in our stores, groceries and warehouses? Why are hundreds of industries and factories operating at reduced capacity or closed? Why are there in Canada at the present time-March 1, 1964-487,000 unemployed, 487,000 minds, 974,000 unemployed arms when thousands and thousands of families are undernourished, ill-clothed and ill-housed?
The answer is simply that the Canadian consumers do not have enough money to buy, at current prices, the goods and services which are offered them.
In a sensational book published in the middle of the depression, that is in 1934, by the Brookings Institute of the United States, Mr. Harold G. Moulton, who was one of President Roosevelt's economic advisers, wrote after an analysis of the economic situation:
-unsatisfied desires of American consumers are at the present time great enough to absorb a production higher than that of 1929. Taking into consideration the necessaries of life of the great mass of the people, innumerable needs remain unsatisfied. The problem is not one of lack of desire, but of lack of buying power.
The Budget-Mr. Caouette

The trouble is clearly not a lack of desire but a lack of purchasing power.

Moulton wrote in his book "America's Capacity to Consume" can be found in the library of parliament, for those who would like to refer to it.
A few years later, that is in 1939, an outstanding British industrialist, director of Vickers for 22 years, director of the London Insurance Company and governor of the Bank of England for nine years, wrote the following on page 50 of a book entitled "Economic Tribulation" which can also be found in the library of parliament.

If the producers are waiting to produce more, if ships are waiting to carry the goods, if there are railway and transport services wheresoever there is a demand for them, then the fault must lie with the consumer. Why does he hold back the trade and commerce and progress of the world and prevent the consummation of a lasting peace by deliberately refusing to avail himself of the good things the world can offer him?
The answer is obvious. The consumer cannot afford to buy more; he has not enough money. Let us discard all biased opinions and we shall find it possible only to arrive at one decision- that the health and welfare of the individual, the happiness of the community, the contentment of the nation and the peace of the world are mainly, if not entirely, a monetary problem.

After those findings by the group of economists of the Brookings institute, by Vincent Cartwright Vickers who was governor of the Bank of England, let us see now what the economists, theologians and sociologists of the churches of Scotland, which I quoted a moment ago, think of this situation. On page 40 of their report, they come to the same conclusions as the Social Crediters-the same conclusions as the Social Crediters, Mr. Speaker-namely, that there is a deficit in purchasing power. Here is how they say it:

The present system does not provide any mechanism by which the supply of purchasing power is automatically geared to the volume of real wealth produced. The classical theory that when goods outrun purchasing power prices will automatically fall to the proper level is bound to break down under present conditions, since the lower level of prices is determined by costs and total costs are determined by the volume of credit issued for production, which must be repaid out of prices.
The principal argument between the orthodox and the unorthodox economists appears to revolve around this point. In the view of the first, the monetary system is merely a reflection of the physical economic system, and there is no question in normal circumstances of purchasing power being in short supply. Such discrepancies as arise are the result of temporary fluctuations that are, or can be, quickly corrected. The monetary reformers for the most part maintain that there
1368	HOUSE OF
The Budget-Mr. Caouette
is a "built-in" flaw in the present system of bank credit accounting that results in a permanent shortage of purchasing power in relation to the total prices of goods offered for sale.

Not only does the report acknowledge the lack of purchasing power, it gives the reasons therefor.
I should like to quote what the authors had to say on page 29 of the same book, after the study they made of the operation of the banking system and of the creation of credit by the banks:

We cannot see any moral justification for the levying of interest on a bank loan which is, as all the experts now agree, "created out of nothing". When a bank "creates" credit in this way, neither it nor any of its customers surrenders title or claim to goods and services, nor do they abstain from "present consumption". Moreover, the addition of interest to the original bank loans, when these loans are the sole source of purchasing power, is a clear cause of purchasing power shortage. Whether or not then the function of "creating credit", that is, of issuing money, reverts in its entirety to the state, as recommended in the preceding paragraph, there cannot be any justification for the levying of a charge for this service beyond a sum sufficient to cover clerical and other costs.

Mr. Speaker, is it simply a question of theories based on Christian requirements or do these findings also take into account economic and banking data?
If you are in doubt, Mr. Speaker, may I quote the testimony of a French Canadian economist, Dr. Rosario Cousineau, director of the commerce department at the University of Sherbrooke, who stated in 1959 before the convention of the chamber of commerce of the province of Quebec, concerning the power entrusted with the chartered banks to create credit, the following, and I quote:
Without intending to take part in the controversy as to whether or not the banks create money, we can state that they create credit, that they multiply their deposits-and their equity- by 10 or 15. Provided they find creditworthy borrowers, they multiply their loans and create credit to the full extent that their loans exceed the total of their deposits and equity.
The title of this study by Dr. Cousineau was "Inflation", the very thing the monetary system itself implies, inflation, about which Grits and Tories, as well as my good friend from St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville (Mr. Dupuis), are so much afraid when they speak of Social Credit.
Do you want other proofs of what Social Crediters have been claiming and shouting throughout Canada for a number of years?
I could give you hundreds of statements concerning the theory of the creation of credit in the banks. Let me mention, as a reminder to the hon. members of the house, just this 

book by Harold G. Moulton, economic adviser to President Roosevelt, who explains from pages 77 to 90 of his book entitled "The Formation of Capital", which is found in the library of parliament, how commercial banks make credit.
He shows, in clearly written pages I would not hesitate to claim as my own, how chartered banks, with an authorized capital of $1 million, are able to loan, even if they do not net any deposit, $100 million.
With a mere stroke of the pen, banks create the credit that they lend afterwards at interest, requiring repayment of capital which they never issue plus interest, so that there is a constant and ever increasing deficit in the purchasing power. That is the cause of our national debt of $1.37 billion, in addition to the loans that have to be made in order to hide the coming deficit.
Mr. Speaker, the consequences of such a financial system under which credit is first created by banks and then lent at interest, are obvious and have been proved. One has only to consider the gradual indebtedness of all governments, the indebtedness of corporations and of individuals, and the great number of commercial bankruptcies.
Such a system leads to the degradation of the individual, to the absolute control of the country and its economy by a small group of financiers and to personal wealth at the expense of the majority of Canadians.
It was not without reason that Pius XI stated:
Those who control the economic life blood of the country have become the masters of our lives and without their permission no one has the right to breathe.
Without the permission of those who control the economic life blood of the country, the Minister of Finance is unable to breathe and the federal government cannot breathe either because those people control the economic and political life of the country, indeed all forms of activity in Canada.
At the present time-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. May I interrupt the hon. member, as he has indicated a moment ago that he intended to move an amendment.
I suppose he relies upon paragraph 7 of standing order 58 of the house, which grants 40 minutes, that is 10 additional minutes to the mover of a subamendment. Unfortunately, under the terms of standing order 45, the hon. member cannot move a subamendment.
Perhaps I could read standing order 45:
Only one amendment and one subamendment may be made to a motion for Mr. Speaker to leave the chair for the house to go into committee of supply or ways and means.

As we already have an amendment and a subamendment before us, he cannot submit another subamendment. I might have waited for the hon. member to finish his remarks after 30 minutes, to remind him of the fact, but I thought he would prefer me to point it out immediately, so he might pursue his comments while keeping the provisions of standing order 45 in mind.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I would, nevertheless appeal to your generosity for granting me the three minutes you just took away in order to inform me of the procedure to be followed. I shall naturally comply with the standing orders.
At this time, Mr. Speaker, 1 would, if I had the time, prove to you, on the basis of statistics, that each Canadian citizen's debt in regard to the federal debt, to the provincial debt, and to the liabilities of schools and individuals, amounts to more than $3,000, and that this debt goes on increasing from year to year because of a banking system which wants all money in circulation to represent a liability for Canadian citizens.
In table 11, which is on page 27 of the white paper tabled by the Minister of Finance, we see that, for the last four years, the service of the public debt cost Canadians $5,849 million, which is more than five times the total budget of the state of Quebec.
Under the present system, everybody gets into debt. These are among others, the headlines we read practically every day in the press, in the Toronto as well as the Montreal and Winnipeg papers:
Bankruptcy here, and another bankruptcy there .. .The schoolboards are on the verge of disaster if their finances are not put on a sounder basis...
Some municipalities are depressed, economically and financially.. .They can no longer balance their budgets.
They can no longer make both ends meet, even in Ottawa and in the provinces.
Why is there so much discontent, so much dissatisfaction? Because, due to expenses that must be incurred, the budget cannot be balanced not because physical possibilities are lacking, but because credit is totally wanting. Mr. Speaker, who profits from the present financial system? Who gets rich when governments, municipalities, school boards and individuals constantly get into debt?
Those who get rich are the bankers. The proof is to be found in the March 11, 1964 edition of the newspaper La Presse, in an article signed Laurent Lauzier, under the title:
The financiers put down their stakes.
This was written not long ago, to wit, on March 11.
The Budget-Mr. Caouette
The article closes with these words:
When the financial community thus gets into action, it is because it feels the imperative need to fashion the new frameworks which are in the offing in order to safeguard or to extend its field of action.
And yet, when those financiers want the passage of bills, we agree. Or perhaps the government will ask us to grant bank charters to new organizations, in order to allow even a greater number of financiers to exploit the Canadian people.
For instance, at present, bank charters are being asked and pressure is being exerted on parliament for the passage of legislation to allow the establishment of new chartered banks in the country.

The most significant seems to be the possibility of a revision of the Bank Act which would enhance the profitability of banking.

They do not make enough profit; they want more.
Mr. Speaker, where is this financial system leading us? Where is the remedy to this situation?
For almost 35 years we have been preaching Social Credit which has been pointing to the solution for a long time. Today other people come to the same conclusions as Social Crediters. I should like to quote once again the excellent report of economist-theologians who say that without a monetary reform, it is impossible to believe in the economic, political and financial liberation of a country or a province.
That leads me to discuss what is happening nowadays in the province of Quebec. Last Friday afternoon, I heard the hon. member for Berthier-Maskinonge-Delanaudiere (Mr. Paul) speak about separatists and insinuate that I did not speak the same language in the English speaking provinces as in the French speaking province.
For the information of the hon. member for Berthier-Maskinonge-Delanaudiere, I get more invitations from English speaking provinces that he ever received in his whole life. I meet students in English speaking universities and what I tell them, I shall repeat it here, in this parliament, this afternoon. I say the same thing in Quebec, in Ontario and in western Canada. If we are complaining in Quebec that the province is 25, 20 or 15 years behind the other provinces, as regards economic development, it is not the fault of the English speaking people in Toronto or Winnipeg.
It is because of French Canadians from the province of Quebec the Napoleonic code, while people with no guts instead of sending aggressive people to defend their interests.

The Budget-Mr. Caouette
I say the same thing in the riding of the hon. member for Berthier-Maskinonge-De-lanaudiere when I go there, and I went a week ago.
Nobody will have me believe that if the province of Quebec did not develop, it is because of other Canadian people of different origins. I never asserted that.
But I know that in the province of Quebec it is possible to proceed by ourselves to our development.
At this time, we hear more and more of the reformation of the constitution, and we are asked by English Canadians from Ontario as well as from western Canada: But what do you want in the province of Quebec to leave us alone so that we will no longer hear about separatism, independence, etc.?
Mr. Speaker, in 1867, when the constitution was written, both elements in Canada were represented; for instance, education was separated, leaving to the province of Quebec its own education system, the civil code was also separated-and we will keep in the province of Quebec the Napoleonic code, while there is something else in Ontario-lines of separation were established at that time and differences were made between the two major ethnic groups in Canada.
What do we want in 1967? The assimilation of other provinces to Quebec? No, Mr. Speaker, I would be the first one to object to the assimilation of any province to the province of Quebec.
We want, when the new Canadian constitution is amended, that some other factors should be considered which will enable the province of Quebec, as well as the other provinces, to expand in a normal way. It is for that reason that we believe and urge that the new constitution should allow the provinces, and the province of Quebec as far as we are concerned:
1.	Credit control. Once we control our credit, it will not rest with the federal Minister of Finance to tax us as he is compelled to do at present to pay tribute to a financial system and to those who control the economic blood of the nation. We, therefore, want control over our credit in the province of Quebec. If the province of Ontario wants the same thing, she should have it. Credit must be decentralized and enable us to develop our province according to its physical possibilities.
2.	Immigration control. We want to know who is going to come and live with us; Ontario should have the same control and so should the other provinces.
3.	Control of our exports, that is of the goods that are exported to the United States and elsewhere in the world, and also control of our imports.


An hon. Member:: Each province.


David Réal Caouette: Each province, naturally.

Fourth, to return to provinces the fiscal and direct taxation powers granted us under the constitution in 1867. What is the government waiting for to return taxation and fiscal powers to the provinces?
Mr. Speaker, those are the four points we are submitting. We suggest that hon. members look them over, study and discuss them. We are not trying to relieve Ontario, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Alberta or the maritime provinces of their responsibilities. On the other hand, let Quebec administer its own affairs as it sees fit. And we feel the same way about the other provinces.
Mr. Speaker, I notice that it is five o'clock. [Text]


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: It being five o'clock the house will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely notices of motions.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS SUGGESTED ESTABLISHMENT OF SECRETARIAT

Mr. Heward Graffiey (Brome-Missisquoi) moved:: That in the opinion of this house the government should consider the advisability of the immediate establishment of a secretariat for federal-provincial relations or a similar institution.

He said: Mr. Speaker, if I recommend today the immediate establishment of a secretariat or of a body of that kind, to improve federal-provincial relations, it is not to revive the classical debate on centralization as opposed, for instance, to provincial autonomy. Everyone recognizes, I think that under our constitution we must have strong governments at the federal, provincial and municipal levels, and that each of them must discharge its own responsibilities.
We recognize today that the spirit of cooperative federalism requires a high degree of consultation with the provinces. It is thus nowadays, as far as the techniques of modern governments are concerned, which imply a notion of planning. In a federal state, without close and continuous consultation, there is bound to be chaos. For the federal government to have the courtesy to resort to consultation in matters directly or indirectly affecting provincial jurisdiction does not imply any idea of retreat or abdication of responsibilities on its part.

I recognize the fact that the Prime Minister has set up some sort of mechanism within the privy council to deal with such matters and that he himself is now personally responsible to parliament for those questions.
I am absolutely convinced that the preparation of federal-provincial conferences, especially in the taxation field, is marked by a lack of co-operation and consultation.
The government should immediately study the ARDA procedure and the findings made in the field of resources. It remains to be seen whether such an organization or secretariat should be general in its nature and should include all questions directly or indirectly involving both levels of government or whether, at the outset, secretariats should be established on a departmental basis.
It is urgently necessary to emphasize consultation on a continuous and co-ordinated basis. The establishment of such an organization or secretariat will not be conducive to the breaking up of our country. But it will contribute to strengthen the ties of confederation.
Obviously, I do not want to exaggerate, it will not solve all problems in this field, but I firmly believe that it will be a practical and fruitful initiative of such a nature as to strengthen unity in diversity.

Mr. Speaker, before closing my remarks this afternoon may I say I recognize it would be inappropriate at this stage to go into too much detail relating to the establishment of a secretariat or other body for federal-provincial relations, but at the same time I would like to offer a few suggestions, which I hope will be practical, relating to the establishment of such a body.
Many of us know after confederation came into being in 1867, Sir John A. Macdonald actually appointed a secretary of state for federal-provincial affairs. He, at that time, recognized the real necessity to strengthen the bonds of national unity and the bonds, so to speak, of confederation. I believe that necessity exists once more today.
Far too many people are making what I term negative declarations concerning the state of our national unity and the state of our confederation. For a number of years I have discussed, both inside and outside this house, the matter of the establishment of this secretariat or a similar body. I know there is a need today for this approach, and I hope it will constitute a practical step forward in unifying our country. For that reason, Mr. Speaker, I hope my resolution and the subject matter contained therein will meet with the general approval of all members of the house.
Dominion-Provincial Relations
I note with a great deal of pleasure that when meeting in Ottawa with the premiers of the provinces a few weeks ago, the Prime Minister expressed general agreement on the subject matter of the resolution I have introduced. I note too with equal pleasure that many of the provincial premiers also expressed general agreement with the terms of this resolution.
As I have already stated, we have had great and useful experience in the secretariat having to do with federal-provincial relations in the resources field. Most members of the house and most of the people of Canada were very interested recently when the Prime Minister established a body of personnel in the privy council offices for federal-provincial affairs. The Prime Minister recognizes the basic, great importance of this subject in that he answers to this house on questions put to him regarding problems existing between Ottawa and the provinces.
Even though I shall now be going into a certain amount of detail, I should like to mention that there was general agreement at the last federal-provincial conference, between the Prime Minister and the provincial premiers, that the time has come to establish a secretariat on the prime minister and premiers level. The Prime Minister and the provincial premiers could form a prime minister and premiers council for federal-provincial relations, and a secretariat could then be formed, similar to the one in the resources field, which would report its findings to the council composed of the Prime Minister and premiers.
The council and secretariat would, of course, be keynoted by a high degree of co-operation and continuous consultation. At the same time, even if such a secretariat were established, we would still have to encourage an increased degree of continuous consultation on a departmental or, if you will, ministerial level. The council of the Prime Minister and premiers, and the secretariat, would cover the general field of federal-provincial relations, and they would have an important co-ordinating function based on continuous consultation. The Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) with his experience in international affairs recognizes that if one enters upon international conferences without adequate preparation, the results are often likely to be disappointing. We have seen this happen often when disarmament has been the subject of such conferences. If such discussions are to have the best chance of success, a great deal of work must be done beforehand in connection with the details of the subject matter; there must be consultation beforehand with those concerned. In other words,

Dominion-Provincial Relations there is a good deal oi homework to be done. The same notion should be the keynote of federal-provincial relations-this idea of continuous and co-ordinated consultation.
In carrying out the recommendations and suggestions that I have put before the house today, a minimum of personnel would be desirable and a minimum of personnel would be required. No empire building is contemplated. No superbody would be established which might possibly lead to an invasion of federal or provincial authority either at the legislative or at the administrative level.
I do hope, Mr. Speaker, that these suggestions will commend themselves to all hon. members and that they will prove useful. Alluding to what I have already said, may I express the hope that they will have a practical and positive unifying effect in our country today, at a time when too many people are making what I consider to be negative, destructive declarations. For this reason I hope that the resolution and the subject matter contained therein will meet with the approval of all hon. members in each and every party, and that the motion will be adopted this afternoon.


Mr. Jean-Charles Caniin (Quebec South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like first of all to congratulate the hon. member for Brome-Mis-sisquoi (Mr. Grafftey) on the very interesting remarks he just made. I think that the setting up of such an organization is an accomplished fact, even though it does not appear in the statutes, because the hon. member must recognize, in all fairness, that the present government has perhaps held more consultations with the provinces than was ever the case in the past.
As a matter of fact, there has been consultation at the level of various departments, including the departments of labour, fisheries, agriculture, natural resources, public works, highways, industry and secretary of state.
In addition, there were numerous conferences-more than usual-at the premiers' provincial level. I believe that in this field, this government has set an example. And as we know that in our parliamentary system, such a procedure is a prerequisite to the setting up of organizations, I believe that we are proceeding at present in the right direction.
But, in due time, we have to give a definite framework to an institution which becomes necessary, from both sides, not as a means of centralization but, mainly I think, as a means of decentralization and of better understanding among the provinces. That is the

reason why I felt I could today mention how important such a body would be as far as decentralization is concerned, taking as an example one of the crown corporations.
I refer to the national film board which, under the direction of its present chairman, Mr. Guy Roberge, who is an intelligent and well-informed man, performs an outstanding job in the field of interprovincial relations and that of relations between Canadians.
Knowing the influence of cinema on education, it is very important that we should consider creating such agencies for the benefit of all provinces.
It is a well-known fact that there is a close relationship between cinema and culture and that film societies attract many students because they give them the opportunity to see significant international as well as national productions.
The role of the national film board is primarily to give a true reflection of Canada. For the board to play that role in accordance with the constitutional rights granted to each province, it would be appropriate in my opinion to set up an agency such as the one proposed by the hon. member for Brome-Mis-sisquoi since the national film board reflects the bicultural character of Canada in two respects, that is in the films it produces and in their distribution.
At the production level, the board has organized itself in such a way that its teams give an account of all forms of activity in Canada, and of the progress realized by our country concerning all aspects of the culture and particular problems of each major ethnical group, without forgetting the more recent contributions made to the Canadian mosaic. Production is divided into two branches. The French language division is under Mr. Pierre Juneau and the English language division comes under Mr. Grant McLean.
As far as the national film board's French production is concerned, one has but to glance at the films produced during the last year or two to find out that such a production endeavours to give a picture of all aspects of life in French Canada. The following is a list of some recent examples:
The film entitled "Les petits arpents", which is a half hour short on the need for farm redevelopment-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. I must tell the hon. member that I have been listening with great interest for the last minutes to the comments he has been making. Nevertheless, he should perhaps try to link his observations concerning the national film board to the motion that is now before us.


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


Jean-Charles Cantin: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the house are prepared to let the hon. member speak on the national film board on the condition that, in the near future, he will suggest, following the establishment of a federal-provincial relations secretariat, and on the first meeting, that the national film board produce a film on the members of the house during a regular sitting.


Jean-Charles Cantin: Mr. Speaker, I humbly submit that it was suitable that I should take the national film board as an example. It is indirectly concerned with education which is primarily a matter under the jurisdiction of the provinces, and it is well known that there are some organizations today that put pressure on governments at all levels.
As a matter of fact, this morning's Le Devoir reported that film producers are requesting the Quebec government to help in the production of full length features by using revenue from the amusement tax.
We also know that such needs exist at the federal level, and I think that through an organization like that one, it would be possible to reach some agreement, and to promote better understanding. And it was to set out the relationship between the national film board, in particular, and a body like the one suggested, that I pointed out the work accomplished by the national film board.
Mr. Speaker, I may have described its activities too fully, but it was only the better to prove my argument, which is that the creation of such an organization will become more and more necessary.
This is why I mentioned the titles of a few films, among others "Paul-Emile Bor-duas", concerning the life and work of that famous painter; the "Lumberjacks of Ma-nouane"-


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. We, on this side of the house, are prepared to allow any necessary latitude to the hon. member, but if we are going to talk about culture and discuss films and lumbermen-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I agree with the hon. member for Joliette, for I myself interrupted the hon. member for Quebec South (Mr. Cantin) a few minutes ago. Therefore, I would again ask the hon. member to connect his remarks to the motion under consideration.


Jean-Charles Cantin: Mr. Speaker, I was simply outlining the important work being accomplished by the national film board, from the 20220-87i
Dominion-Provincial Relations point of view of relations among the various provinces as well as among the various cultures in this country.
As suggested by the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi, this body should not be operated for centralization, and that is why I believe the government should have a littletime before creating this body or defining its duties. In my opinion, we should establish a very flexible body, the role of which would be, not to centralize, but to decentralize and to ensure, between the various provinces and the central government, better co-operation and better understanding.


Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, the topic of this motion is one that has been of much interest and concern to those in this party and to me personally. On two occasions in previous sessions I have introduced a motion to set up a permanent, full scale ministerial department of government to deal with the matter of federal-provincial affairs. I appreciate the resolution that is now before us, introduced by the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey). I appreciate, also, the non-partisan way in which the hon. member spoke. It is with a good deal of pleasure that we give our support to this motion. I do believe it would be more constructive if members of the government would be just a little more positive in their remarks regarding the motion and would say whether they are for or against it.
I have just been checking over some of the remarks made last year with regard to this subject, and I think it might be well if we were to refresh our memories on certain aspects of it which the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi did not really bring out in his remarks. Confederation was a coming together of the provinces. We have heard a great deal about co-operative federalism. I think one of the reasons we have as many problems as we do today in Canada is simply that we have not lived up to the spirit of the original confederation. What is needed today -while we do give credit for as much cooperative federalism as has been indicated by the government-is a greater degree of cooperative federalism based upon the concept of confederation of 100 years ago. Basically this original concept of confederation was an agreement among the provinces to form a nation, Canada. There was to be a federal form of government. Canada was to be a nation that not only maintained its independence as far as its relationships with the United States were concerned, but also with the mother country, and other colonial countries across the sea. I think that if our federal administration could establish a greater degree
1374	HOUSE OF
Dominion-Provincial Relations of co-operation in those various fields which overlap between provincial and federal responsibility, and if there could be a greater amount of co-ordination, we would really have a greater sense of unity and national spirit in Canada.
It is true that provincial governments lead the way in this particular field. A number of provincial governments have actually set up departments to deal with federal-provincial affairs. I believe, as the record will show, they have found these departments to be very useful. This does not only apply in the field of resources but it applies in regard to one of the most critical problems that we face today as far as federal-provincial relations are concerned. I refer to the field of taxation. Certainly many of the fiscal problems that we have today would not be there if we had a greater degree of understanding relating to the shared cost programs which have developed in recent years.
Another aspect of our national development that is very important at the present time is a national highways program. We will never have the national highways program that this country needs unless it is done on the basis of co-ordinated understanding and co-operation with the provinces. The same problem exists with regard to education and health. We maintain that education and health are basic responsibilities of the provinces; yet there are fields within education and health which just cannot be divided into as many compartments as we have provinces. The basic problem which faces all educational departments in the different provinces relates to the question of money and the co-ordination of programs which affect the entire nation. Therefore it is my opinion, as I have thought over the establishment of such an organization on the federal scene, that probably the first step toward a full scale ministerial department of government would be the setting up of a secretariat such as is now being suggested.
It is on this basis that we give our full support to the motion before us. We trust that the government members who are yet to speak will consider this matter in the light of the tremendous importance of the topic with which we are now dealing. It seems to me that such a secretariat would not only eliminate many of the problems which face the government at this time, but it would also prepare and pave the way for a better understanding with regard to some of the problems which are not yet at the critical stage. Still other problems can be anticipated, and certainly there would be a greater sense of national spirit and unity than we have at the present time if the subject matter of this motion were put into effect.


I do not wish to deal with this subject at any great length, Mr. Speaker, but I believe that we as members of this house, being representative of all the provinces and a cross section of political thought in this country, have as one of our most urgent responsibilities to think of and be concerned with the problem of national unity. I do not think there is any other single way through which we can develop the national unity which I believe all of us would like to see in our country, as far as government is concerned, than by the setting up of such a secretariat as is proposed. Therefore we give our support to this measure. I would urge that all hon. members take a positive attitude, not just to the motion before the house but to the whole related question of national unity in our country, thus facilitating in a tremendous way the growth of our country by working together in a more efficient and effective manner.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Speaker, I just want to put on record the support of our party for the intent of this motion, and we would be glad to have the opportunity of voting for it if a vote were called. The subject opens up a great many areas into which one can go. It has always been my observation that as a preliminary to a secretariat we require a much stronger prime minister's office than we have at the present time. I am not talking about the incumbent but about the office as such, although one could make some comments about the incumbent too. But as I see it, the previous prime minister had, and the present Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) has, an inadequate staff to deal with many of its relationships. It also seems to me that the prime minister's office is not only the power centre of our form of government at the present time, but it is particularly so where provincial relationships are concerned.
I do not think one could really consider a secretariat in detail without considering how it would be centred in the prime minister's office. I am also of the opinion that the privy council and its present staff should fight for its tie-in with the cabinet in ministerial meetings; but again the staff is inadequate to support the office of the prime minister. On this point, I think that anyone who wanted to find someone who could speak in French on policy in the prime minister's office at the present time would go very short. That is just one indication of how stripped is the office of the prime minister, or how barren it is at the present time; there is not one press officer who can speak in the French language and would be the opposite number of Mr. O'Hagan. I mention that as an example of the fact that

the staff of the main power centre of the administration at the present time, certainly as regards relationships with the provinces, is hopelessly inadequate; and it seems to me that any development of a secretariat at the federal level to deal with federal-provincial relations should be centred around and in the prime minister's office.
Another factor here, one which we would welcome, is that it would enable us to come much more to grips with the way that a prime minister is able to handle his responsibility to the House of Commons in respect of relationships with the provinces, where his authority at the present time seems to me to be blurred by the role of cabinet ministers and the fact that we have cabinet solidarity and secrecy. I think the reality of power at the present time is that we should see it focused more strongly in the prime minister's office and should have an opportunity to see it displayed in front of us so that we could analyse it, comment upon it and make demands upon it. I do not think we have that at the present time, and this proposal of the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey) would go some way toward opening up this kind of development.
Therefore we should like to go on record as approving the motion, and we should like to see whether the government could follow up in working out, in concert with other parties in the house through some kind of committee, the kind of secretariat which would be useful so as to fulfil the general intention of the hon. member's proposal.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words on that motion. First of all, I want to congratulate the sponsor, the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey) for introducing it.
In my opinion, if we were to achieve the object of that motion I am sure that it would help improve the situation which exists between the provinces and the federal government with regard to certain bills. At the present time, relations with the provinces are strained, more especially between the province of Quebec and the federal government, because, instead of co-operative federalism we have rather centralizing federalism. I believe that such a permanent secretariat for federal-provincial relations would tend to prevent the federal government from interfering in all sorts of fields which are none of its concern. Besides, the federal government would certainly have to consult with the provinces before introducing its budget.
Dominion-Provincial Relations
In the past, we had several examples of tensions between the provinces and the federal government. For instance, when the federal government passed municipal loans legislation, some provinces criticized that action, and rightly so.
At this time we have before us-and it was mentioned in the speech from the throne debate-a bill concerning loans to students. We all know that the province of Quebec and various organizations, even at the national level, protested against that intrusion of the central government in the field of education which belongs to the provinces.
Furthermore, with that permanent secretariat sitting all year round, some problems of joint federal and provincial responsibility could be referred to it, as, for instance, the matter of lotteries, or water pollution control which is a problem concerning the federal as well as the provincial governments.
For this reason, I think that the suggestion made in this motion is constructive. Its implementation would provide a greater respect for the provinces and assist substantially in reaching a better understanding, which in the end would promote the cause of national unity.
Those are all the remarks I had to make. I take this opportunity to add that I think the government should accept this motion and introduce a measure to set up that secretariat which would be very useful for all the provinces and for the federal government.


Mr. Marvin Gelber (York South):: Mr. Speaker, after the remarks of the hon. member for Quebec South (Mr. Cantin) I suppose hon. members expect me to speak about the national gallery. I might even venture to speak about the C.B.C., but I would imagine that some hon. member would rise and under rule 26 move the adjournment of the house. We have had the suggestion here that consultation has moved in the direction of centralizing power in this country, and that somehow or other this government has shared in that. I should like to point out with regard to the shared cost programs that the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Miss LaMarsh) has indicated that the federal government would co-operate in transferring some of these programs to the provincial governments. In the last few days we have witnessed a bill being introduced in the legislature of the province of Ontario in a matter relating to the Criminal Code which is a scandal and a disgrace, and if there had been consultation with the federal

Dominion-Provincial Relations government by the province in that case, Mr. Speaker, the humiliation which most Canadians feel might have been avoided.
Now, Mr. Speaker, the question of consultation was well set out by the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) on the occasion of the dominion-provincial conference last November. The chief area of consultation is that of joint responsibility. There is a fruitful field which might well be explored and developed. A very important factor is not the setting up of machinery which would be approved; the most important factor is that there be regularity of consultation. If there is regularity of consultation, it can be planned and anticipated, and there could be a meeting together and a sharing of minds. I believe one of the important things which we must develop in our provincial-federal relationship is this regularity of consultation.
A number of members have spoken about having a minister in the federal government responsible for federal-provincial matters. The hon. member for Port Arthur (Mr. Fisher) pointed out that this should be the special domain of the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson), and thus an advantage might be gained by extending his staff so that they would be trained to deal with this problem. The Prime Minister could answer questions concerning federal-provincial problems. If we were to set up a special minister we might, in fact, encumber consultations; we might not facilitate them. We know, for instance in the international sphere there are consultations between various branches of this government and branches of government in other countries. These consultations are quite often so intimate that the normal channels of diplomacy are not the prime avenue for them. I think it is very important that we should develop easy, quick and efficient means of consultation. If this were to be accomplished through the establishment of a special minister, it might well be that this would encumber the consultations.
Each authority must set up its own machinery. It is not for us, in this house, to say what the province of Ontario, the province of Quebec or the province of Prince Edward Island should do. We must think of our own facilities. The area of consultation does not necessarily apply to the same ministry in each province. We know that the federal Department of Labour has responsibility for co-ordinating the vocational training programs and the apprenticeship programs. In point of fact, different ministries in different provinces have responsibility for both of these programs, and in some provinces responsibility is split between two ministries. You cannot always consult with one ministry


in a province in dealing with any one of these particular areas of responsibility.
Certainly, Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey) upon his presentation and to commend the remarks made by the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Thompson) concerning national unity in this country. We have to free ourselves from the easy going attitude we have had towards our problems, towards our responsibilities. We must respond to meet the economic challenges and to meet the other challenges which confront us as a people at all levels. The resolution of the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi draws attention to the important problem of federal-provincial relations and, in my opinion, focuses attention on this important area of Canadian life which requires examination, which requires planning and which requires consultation.
We have set up an economic council which has taken over responsibility in terms of planning, and which will consult with the provinces on various areas of life in this country. This council will have channels of consultation and channels for planning. I do not believe we can crystallize all these problems in terms of one suggestion, in terms of one idea. I believe we are going to develop channels of consultation. We are going to delineate areas in which consultation can be more effectively conducted. I believe that in this manner, in a pragmatic way, by developing areas of consultation, by recognizing areas of joint responsibility, by ensuring regularity of consultation, we can facilitate the solution of problems in these important areas of our national life.
I think the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi is to be complimented for his statement, for his resolution, and I am certain that in every way we must keep continually before us the important problem of dominion-provincial relations which cuts across many areas of our national life.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, we, in this corner of the house, would also like to give our opinion on the motion submitted by the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey).
I feel that the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi deserves to be congratulated for suggesting that a secretariat for federal-provincial relations be set up.
In the past, the setting up of such an organization would have had an impact, for instance with regard to municipal loans, because without it, at one time, the federal government had to back down in order to

study the circumstances surrounding the loans to the municipalities and to give at least some measure of satisfaction to all interested parties.
In the case of the national pension scheme, for instance, the federal members were asked to consider such a plan when Quebeckers knew all the time that the Quebec government intended to introduce its own plan without the federal members for Quebec knowing anything about it. If there had been a secretariat for federal-provincial relations, then we would have known what was going to take place in Quebec, and this secretariat would have been able to co-ordinate the views of all concerned. In this way we would have been able to choose between the provincial and the federal pension plans.
The same thing goes for student loans. At present the authorities and those who are most directly concerned, the students of the province of Quebec, are against the proposed federal legislation because education comes under the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces.
If there had been a secretariat for federal-provincial relations, perhaps the central government would have been more cautious and would have given serious consideration to the representations made and the arguments invoked by the provinces before taking the kind of action which the present government has been initiating during the past year especially.
There is one point on which I should like to insist.
Minor details as a whole do not reveal the federal government's present policies, which are far from being consistent with understanding and agreement between the federal and the provincial governments, but there is still something more important, I think, and it is that we have been witnessing for some time federal-provincial conferences, where the federal government is endeavouring to solve the problems facing the ten provinces and we believe that on such occasions, the things at stake in the discussions are not seen in their true perspective.
Each province has problems to discuss, each province has rights to defend, especially the province of Quebec.
I believe that the discussions should no longer take place between the federal government and the ten provinces; if we mean to reach an agreement the discussions should be conducted between the federal government and the province of Quebec alone, one facing the other, as equal partners. There should not be on one side, the federal government, and on the other, the province of Quebec with the other nine provinces, because, in this case, the discussion is distorted, each province
Dominion-Provincial Relations brings in her arguments and leads the discussion according to her own wishes, and nothing is solved.
Such a secretariat for federal-provincial relations might promote discussion, not only between the ten provinces and the federal government on the one hand, but also between the federal government and the government of one province particularly concerned. If a province was faced with some problem, or wished to suggest some solutions or present some arguments, it might deal directly with the federal government and would not have to sit around a table with ten other governments, when the object of those conversations would quite often concern only that particular province and the federal government.
Mr. Speaker, this would be the only way of settling the disputes between the provinces and the federal government.
During the last federal-provincial conference, in November 1963-and the same thing will happen again at the beginning of April- we saw that when ten provinces, all with different interests, were each discussing some point of particular interest, the government was unable to settle any problem and to find any solution.
When discussions take place between the federal government and the government of each individual province, some issues will probably be settled.
I think that this federal-provincial secretariat might be charged with looking after the problems of each province. Everyone knows that the province of Quebec-and I am speaking of that province because it is my own, just as other hon. members for Saskatchewan or Manitoba will speak about wheat, because they come from the wheat growing provinces-has some particular problems to settle. If they cannot be settled at this time, it is due to the lack of a body to promote frank and sincere discussions between the Ottawa and the Quebec governments.
Mr. Speaker, I say this because I do not see how Quebec can be interested in the problems of Newfoundland, British Columbia or Manitoba. I do not see how the representatives of these various provinces, by meeting with the federal government, can discuss advisedly a given problem.
It is why I contend that such a secretariat should have as its aim to analyse the problems according to circumstances in regard to situation or location. Then, valid solutions could be arrived at which would satisfy everybody, since everyone would have the opportunity of outlining his problems and discussing them as he wished.

Dominion-Provincial Relations
Mr. Speaker, 1 shall refrain from speaking any longer, so that the motion of the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey) may be put to a vote.


John B. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, I had thought there was considerable agreement on this motion until I heard the debate. Evidently each person who has spoken in support of the motion supports it for quite different reasons. The hon. member for Port Arthur (Mr. Fisher) indicated that his party is in agreement with the motion. The hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomp-tion-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon) indicated that he personally is in favour of the motion. I suspect that the reasons are diametrically opposed. I am rather surprised, I must say, that the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm should take the stand that he did because as the veritable leader of his party in the province of Quebec one would have thought that as a member of this house he would have been more concerned about the jurisdiction of the federal government.
There is no doubt, Mr. Speaker, that integration of our economy and society grows apace and that co-operation of a kind never dreamed of a hundred years ago between the several branches of our governments is now necessary. This is especially true in the area of economic development. I am sure that when the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) wishes to propose programs for the development of Atlantic Canada he feels embarrassed by the fact that the federal government can do only certain things and must rely on the provinces to complement what he proposes in this house by their own provincial programs.
My hope would be that a federal-provincial secretariat of the kind proposed by the hon. member would strengthen the bonds of our national unity. I hope that in such a secretariat we would have the opportunity to exchange information, to become aware of the problems of the various parts of the country, and to co-ordinate our diverse plans. It seems to me that there is an error abroad in the land, and I thought I could detect it rather clearly in the remarks of the hon. member for Lapointe (Mr. Gregoire). The implication there was that Canada is a country produced by two founding races. I think this label is a useful one when we are talking about one of the problems confronting our parliament and our people at this time. But this label conceals much of the reality. Let us remember that Canada is a confederation of provinces, originally three or four with others added later. I would hope that a secretariat of this kind,

being a meeting place for the federal government and representatives of the several provinces, would emphasize the fact that this country is a federation of provinces, and that any problems of other kinds there are will be dealt with as superimposed upon this fact.
A good deal of preliminary co-operation would be necessary if such a secretariat is to be established. I do not think we in this house can presume to advise the provinces that they should set up a sector representing them in a federal-provincial secretariat. It seems to me that the hon. member for Port Arthur made a very shrewd observation concerning the Prime Minister's office. Perhaps it was only speculation, but if so it would probably be borne out by an examination of the real facts.
There will have to be a good deal of exploration with regard to what such a secretariat will accomplish before we can push ahead to devise the precise machinery of the secretariat. I think this is important to remember because such a secretariat is not without its dangers. The people of Canada are represented here now by a parliament. It would be hazardous to create another entity of government, a kind of national congress, a kind of congress of ambassadors supplanting this parliament and thereby supplanting the direct, democratic procedures on which this House of Commons is based. Nevertheless, despite these dangers I think we should explore this idea, not so that the secretariat would become a congress in effect making the law for the land, but so that it might become a place for the exchange of information and for consultation among and between the several governments in this country. I will not attempt to explore, as did the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Thompson), some of the more fundamental questions that would be-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. The hour appointed for the consideration of private members' business has expired.
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at 8 p.m.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration of the motion of Hon. Walter L. Gordon (Minister of Finance) that Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair for the house to go into committee of ways and means, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Nowlan.
Mr. D. G. Hahn (Broadview):: Mr. Speaker, it is enjoyable to play to a packed house.


Eric Alfred Winkler: Where are your colleagues.


David George Hahn: I was going to open my remarks tonight with a few kind comments to some of my colleagues on the other side, but the particular colleagues I wish to address myself to are not here, so I shall stop the pleasantries and move on to the main purpose of my speech dealing with the budget.
The hon. member for Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands (Mr. Cameron) indicated that a budget should and must be more than just a government housekeeping list. He indicated that it must primarily be a document that indicates the social purpose of the government. To me this is very, very true. A budget is a document through which a political party expresses its social purpose in practical terms. It is the instrument through which the theory of its social ideals is translated into practice, and it is with this aspect of the budget I should like to deal tonight.
I realize that a budget is also so many other things, and deals with problems of trade, investment and so on. However these are things that were covered in the budget speech, and undoubtedly will be covered by other hon. members on both sides of the house, so I shall not deal with them. A budget does many things, and in the social field it has a distinct purpose. I think you can see what purpose a budget has, you can recognize the social policy when you look at a budget's approach to the way in which revenue is raised and, obviously on the other side of the coin, to the way in which moneys are spent, the level of the expenditures and the direction in which they go.
I should like to look at these particular factors in the present budget. First of all, let us look at how we raise the revenue we need. The hon. member for Nanaimo-Cowi-chan-The Islands criticized the budget, and criticized quite severely the fact that there was no tax on capital gains. He suggested large sums were being made, large profits were being earned, and that not one nickel of this was finding its way into the public treasury. He would tax these profits thereby, in his own words, "preventing a grossly inequitable distribution of that income."
The effect of this would be to put a ceiling on the business opportunities that are available in this country. He would seek to redistribute the income in the country through taxes, in such a way that you would lift the bottom up, helping those people who need help but at the same time putting the lid on the top, or limiting the opportunities available. He would seek then to add to 20220-88
The Budget-Mr. Hahn the maxim, that all men are born equal, the words, and shall so remain.
I reject this; I think it is wrong.
It seems to me that over the years the structure of our taxation, the means we use to reap our revenue, have grown a bit lopsided. The original purposes are probably becoming a bit obscure as more needs are added year by year and more funds are needed to meet them, but we still do have an underlying philosophy within our taxation system of redistribution by progressive income and other taxes. We have remaining some incentive for private investment for capital gains, for the entrepreneur to invest money in the country, because these capital gains are not yet taxed; but the system has become blurred and confused over the years.
This year, for reasons outlined by the Minister of Finance, we are not making a change in the fundamental basis of collecting our revenue, but by the end of this year the report of the royal commission on taxation should be presented and in our next budget we should see the start of changes in our method of collecting revenue which should reflect the social purpose of the government. When we do I hope that in making these changes we recognize what we ought to do to meet our basic needs.
First of all, I think it is imperative that we always recognize the needs of those people who are not able by themselves to maintain a minimal, reasonably decent standard of living. I hope that we always continue to distribute from those that have to those that have not. We must provide means to alleviate the hard core of suffering that still exists in our country. As a Liberal these things are inherent in my philosophy. In doing this we must be very careful that we do not remove strong incentives for those who would like to invest, strong incentives for advancement and opportunity within our country.
I do not think we can attempt to follow a social pattern of trying to produce an artificial equality. We must allow room for free competitive opportunities in a free society so that people can find their own levels. I expect taxation to effect a redistribution of income, to put a floor under hardship and misery within the country. I am sure Conservative members of the Conservative party would want the same thing, although I am sure we could not agree on the level at which this floor should be. The important thing is that we must try and put this floor under misery without at the same time putting a ceiling on top of opportunity.
All men may be born equal, but I think it is folly to say they are going to die that way. So, when we revise out taxes I hope we allow, maintain, continue and probably
1380	HOUSE OF
The Budget-Mr. Hahn increase the opportunities for advancement, the opportunities for competitive operations within the country and that we shall not attempt to create an artificial equality that we cannot maintain.
Now let us turn to the other side of the coin. Let us look at the spending. The Conservative amendment suggests in true Conservative fashion that we are spending too much and that our deficits are too high.


Eric Alfred Winkler: That is after what you said; do not forget that.


David George Hahn: I welcome this return to Conservative principles on the part of hon. members opposite. I do not agree with this view but I think it is time it was expressed.


Eric Alfred Winkler: You said we were spending too much.


David George Hahn: Hearing these Conservative
views expressed, I think there is something about the acoustics of this hall which makes those views much more palatable when they come from Mr. Speaker's left. I hope it remains that way.
What should we be trying to achieve in our levels of spending? Is it realistic to expect the absolute levels of expenditure in this country to decline? Can we really chop great chunks out of our spending? I, for one, would like to see reduced levels of expenditure, as I am sure most people would, because if we spent less it might be possible to cut taxes. But is it realistic to expect such cuts? There are only two ways, as far as I am aware, in which to cut spending. The first is by increasing the efficiency with which money is spent so as to make maximum use of every dollar. The other way in which to save money is to cut out items which are not needed.
It is unfortunate but true, I think, that governments are inherently inefficient in their spending operations. It seems to me that waste goes hand in hand with the size of the operation, which is an inescapable part of all government operations. The Glassco commission pointed this out in most definite terms. The present government is now implementing the recommendations of that royal commission and its action in so doing will increase the efficiency with which the government spends its money. We are likely to realize some attractive savings in consequence, but I do not believe that the total savings to be realized in this way will be significant or substantial enough to lead to a significant fall in government expenditure.
I think steps taken toward making the machinery of government more efficient will be both beneficial and productive but I do


not think they can be maintained to the extent of producing fundamental changes. It seems to me we must also be realistic enough to realize that, no matter which party is in power over the years, new examples of inefficiency will creep into the administration while some of the old ones we thought had been got rid of will return, despite all the efforts which were made to get rid of them. So it seems that at some stage in the future we shall be obliged to go through the whole procedure again and review once more the efficiency of our spending. It is unfortunate, but I think these problems are inherent in any government operation and I do not believe any government could count on long term substantial reductions in expenditure as a result of increasing its efficiency.
This means that the only way in which we could successfully cut expenditure, should we decide to do so, would be by reducing the number of items on which we are spending money or by reducing the amount spent on each. Last session, as a new member, I sat in this chamber during the presentation of the estimates. In my naive ignorance I thought I was witnessing the process by which parliament exercised control over the public purse strings. I expected to hear members querying various items of expenditure to find out whether they were really necessary, whether the amount spent could be reduced, and so on. As we all know, that is not what happens. There are, obviously, exceptions. But the impression I received was of a number of speeches aimed at urging the government to spend money on things which might be popular with constituents back home.
Members' sitting opposite who, in their criticism, complained by and large that we were spending too much money, failed to produce many concrete or constructive ideas as to where our spending might be cut. There were notably few suggestions from the other side of the house in this regard. Parliamentary perusal of expenditure seemed to resolve itself into general requests for more spending. The idea that parliament controls the purse strings during the examination of the estimates is not a realistic one, in my opinion, and I hope that the committee which is now studying procedures of the house will consider this particular matter and, possibly, recommend that the estimates be studied in some other way, for instance in a committee where some effective work could be carried out. If this were done we might be able to bring about some savings, though I do not think that any major savings could be effected. Thus, neither by increasing our efficiency nor by improved methods of parliamentary scrutiny are we likely to achieve substantial cuts in our spending levels.

I know that Conservatives are opposed to increases in government spending. It is a natural conservative tendency-I mean to begin that word with a small "c"-to resist such increases. However, there are still a number of fields in which there is a need for continued and even increased public expenditure. For example, I do not believe that we have by any means done all we ought to do in the field of welfare in this country. There are still far too many Canadians who are existing in living conditions which most of us would consider deplorable. There are some who say we ought drastically to slash our expenditures in this area. I should like to take them to certain parts of my own riding where they would see people living in substandard housing, ill clothed, ill fed and worried about medical bills. I am sure they would then feel, as I do, that this is not worthy of Canada in 1964. In the field of welfare therefore, if we are to satisfy my conscience at least we should be spending more, not less.
There are, in fact, a number of directions in which there is still a continuing need for public expenditures. For example, we need to direct more funds to investment in this country. We need to spend more money training people in the new technology so that they can obtain and retain employment in a technological society. We need to develop those areas of our country where unemployment remains high; we need to establish and develop industries which are capable of competing in a world where tariff changes are likely to take place. We must continue the process of investing in the human and material resources of our country-any program of this kind will mean continuing certain expenditures in the future. If we do not make these expenditures we shall, in the long term, be confronted with the need to make welfare payments on an ever increasing scale, the consequence of not having prepared ourselves for the changes which lay ahead.
The hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings (Mr. Nowlan) criticized the increases in expenditure associated with the new Department of Industry. This department has two main functions. One of them is area development, aimed substantially at fulfilling a definite need in this country by concentrating on those regions where unemployment is higher than it should be. These are the problem areas about which we must do something if we are to achieve a reasonable balance across the country. The department has another purpose, namely, to work with industry and assist it in reaching a position where it is competitive in the export markets which we must seek. Surely these aims are worthwhile aims and if we do not achieve them 20220-88i
The Budget-Mr. Hahn we shall suffer for it later on, since the consequence will undoubtedly be increased unemployment. It does not seem valid to me therefore, to criticize the expenditure of money for these purposes. The Atlantic development board has a somewhat similar function but I notice the hon. member was. not too critical of expenditures made in this particular area.
I think it is perfectly valid to criticize the way in which the department is carrying out its responsibilities. It is obviously too early yet to say whether it has done a good or a poor job. The basis on which it started indicates that it is doing a good job, but a few years from now there may be a very valid criticism that the department is not doing the job it should be doing. However, this is no reason to criticize the basic need of establishing a department to carry out these functions that I think had to be carried out. So that this, again, is an area where I say that spending must continue, must expand; we must continue to make expenditures in areas that are going to help the economy of the country develop for the future.
On the basis of this, then, there are many, many areas where we are not now doing the job we should be doing. There are many areas where we could be and perhaps should be, spending more, not less, than we are. So that to me the balance, the distinguishing factor, the thing that is important is that we have all these needs that we are not now meeting because we only have certain resources with which to meet them. On the basis of this I cannot see expenditure going down, in absolute terms. It is a question of at what rate will our expenditures rise.
It seems to me we have to concern ourselves with the rate of rise of our expenditures and not think in terms of absolute cuts. We have to concern ourselves with what is the right rate of rise of expenditure, in what priority, and to what things do we put the increased money which we are spending. I think in this budget we see a good example of what, to my mind, is a proper balance of these factors.
We are increasing our spending by some per cent or so; the gross national product is forecast to rise to about 5 per cent, so we are not plowing all our gains into increased expenditures. We are doing what I also feel we must do; we are using some of our gains in order to reduce the deficit. We are reducing the deficit by one third this year; we are starting to get that under control. I hope that in the future we will get the deficit wiped out. I would like to see surpluses so that we can reduce our debt load, because this is one place where we can save money in absolute terms.

The Budget-Mr. Slogan
Also, I should like to see tax cuts so there is greater incentive to Canadians. But as of now, I think the amount of spending increase that is forecast for this year relates to two things; the fact that there is always a need, and a legitimate need, for greater expenditures and the size of our deficit. In view of the gross national product increase, I think the increased expenditures forecast for this year are reasonable. Look at what we are expending these funds on. It seems to me that the type of expenditures we are making balance against the social factors that I think have to be balanced. One is providing opportunities for Canadians in terms of job retraining and educational grants in terms of employment opportunities, and through such things as the bonus on housing, the municipal loan and development fund, and all these other projects. It seems to me that by spending money in this area we are meeting the economic needs of the country.
Also, through our educational grants, through the relief of taxes to students, we are trying to provide, as I think we must, the equality of opportunity for Canadians that I think is so important and desirable. What we are not doing to the full extent that we must- and we will be doing this over the years and will always have to continue it as we get in better financial shape-is this; we must still go after the problem of substandard living conditions. But I think for this year we are moving in the right direction; we are putting our increased expenditures into those things that are needed to build up the country in the future.
So I think this budget is sound. I do not believe we should be criticized for an absolute increase in our expenditure, bearing in mind the rate of growth of the economy in relative terms and the increased percentage of gross national product. Our total expenditures are moving down and our budget deficit is coming into balance. I think the area in which we are spending is also in line with the sort of things to which I like to see increased expenditures go. So if I may quote from the well known commercial, to me the spending side of this budget is right for our times.


Mr. Joseph Slogan (Springfield):: Mr. Speaker, last Monday evening, like other members of parliament and like people all across the country, I listened very attentively to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) as he brought down the budget. To say the least, it was a disappointment. Last year the minister could be called the great surgeon. He came into this great operating room of parliament and brought forth his patient, the ailing economy, and began to operate to remove the ulcers. Before he had finished, he had amputated all the patient's limbs.


Stanley Howard Knowles: And left the clamps inside.


Joseph Slogan: The pundits of the Liberal party are certainly not following that course this year. The great surgeon is treating the ills of the economy with aspirins and with the occasional sugar-coated pill. Surely this is not that bold, aggressive approach that was promised to the people of Canada in the last election campaign. In fact, it seems that the front bench of this government, although so young in power, is peopled by old and tired men who lack initiative, imagination and the aggressiveness that is needed to set this economy on the right road again. Again, I must say that in listening to some of the backbenchers I thought they exhibited better insight and more common sense than the men on the front bench.
How are we supposed to judge this budget? The only criteria we can use in judging the budget are the criteria which the Liberal party themselves set in the election promises of the last campaign, and also in the criticisms of the economy as it existed under the former government. So let us look at the economy in the last year of the Conservative government. Our gross national product showed an increase of 8 per cent; one third more than in this fiscal year. Certainly, if they said that 8 per cent was not enough to get the economy moving, they should be doing something to surpass 8 per cent.
Another yardstick, of course, is the cost of living index. In 1962 the late President Kennedy said that Canada had attained the greatest price stability among all the nations of the free world. In fact, in the last three years of the Conservative administration the cost of living index was kept well below what it is this year. Therefore we not only had greater stability of price and a higher gross national product, but we had greater national production. It is the true index of growth in the economy. National production in the last year of the Conservative government was 6.4 per cent, as against 4.3 per cent last year. That, again, was almost one third higher. In the last election campaign the Liberal party said the country was standing still; they said the economy had to be put on the tracks again, it had to be set in motion. By their own standards, by their own criteria, they have failed. They have failed most miserably the people of Canada and their own party.


An hon. Member:: Hypocrites.


Joseph Slogan: I would like to come back to this topic a little later, Mr. Speaker. I would now like to look at some of the sugar-coated pills. One is the extension in family

allowances to children of 16 and 17 years of age who remain in school. This, of course, was part of the Conservative platform in the last election campaign. We in this party brought forth a resolution a few weeks ago, and the people on the other side of the chamber decided to vote against it. Now they bring it in. It is welcomed; it is good; we support it. Then there is the loan provision to students, which is also very much welcomed and which we support.
But we wonder what has happened to all those scholarships which the Liberal party promised the young people of Canada. There has been the exemption of tuition fees of part-time students, and I understand that this is being extended to graduates in the technical and professional fields who undertake postgraduate and refresher courses. I welcome this. I was one who over the years tried to achieve this. I also think that as well as tuition fees the cost of instruments, books, and travelling and living expenses should be included. After all, the professional man contributes a large portion of the income in the coffers of the federal treasury, and he is being penalized twice. He has not been encouraged to take refresher courses and keep abreast of advances in technology, which are in essence a capital investment for him because through his added knowledge he earns more money, which means added income to the federal treasury.
I hope the Minister of Finance will give consideration to greater exemption for postgraduate courses. It is anomalous that at the present time the professional man can go to an international or domestic convention once a year and write off all his expenses, whereas if he undertakes a refresher course, that is not possible. Inasmuch as most of these courses are undertaken in different countries or different parts of Canada, this is a real necessity.
I should now like to make a few remarks on the current account deficit in our international balance of payments. As the report of the Bank of Canada shows, in the last few years there has been a substantial decline in this deficit and there has been a welcome decline this year. As the Bank of Canada report shows, if it had not been for two factors, the devaluation of the dollar and large sales of grain to communist countries, that deficit would have been larger this year than last. Certainly here are two stories which deserve retelling. The hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Horner) mentioned these factors this afternoon, and I should also like to say a little on the story of wheat.
It can truly be said that this year the farmers of the country did a great deal to attain what growth there has been in the
The Budget-Mr. Slogan economy and contributed to the improvement in our international balance of payments. When the Conservative party came to power in 1957 we inherited large surpluses of wheat, owing to the fact that the policy of the Liberal party was this: If people want our wheat, let them come and get it, because we grow the best wheat in the world. Part of the national agricultural policy of the former Conservative government was that of accelerated sales. We went out and sold wheat. Then came the Chinese wheat deal. Mr. Hazen Argue, who was the leader of the C.C.F. party and then latterly the agriculture spokesman of the Liberal party, stated that this was not a wheat deal at all because there was no fixed price, and therefore it was bad for Canada.
But was it bad for Canada? How short can memories be? We in western Canada remember how the Liberal party sold the western farmers down the river in the British wheat deal when, because of a fixed price, hundreds of millions of dollars were lost to the farmers in the west when the world market price of wheat soared. Then after that, feeling sorry for the farmers, the Liberal government of that day took $60 million from the taxpayers' pockets and distributed it amongst the western farmers, giving them a return of 10 cents on the dollar as compared with the money which could have been earned when world prices increased. When the Chinese wheat deal was negotiated the price was $1.67 a bushel. Then the price went up to over $2. You remember, Mr. Speaker, the great march on Ottawa by the western farmers who were asking for deficiency payments on grain of 30 cents a bushel. They got their deficiency payments through the increase in world prices and it did not cost the taxpayers a cent. This has been the policy of the Conservative party, and it is little wonder that the agricultural people of Canada support us.
I have been talking about agriculture and I do not want to get into a detailed discussion on it, but our whole approach to the problems of agriculture, which hitherto have been tackled piecemeal, was to bring in a national policy to provide for the basic needs of the farmers. First of all we required stability of prices, so we brought in the stabilization act. Then there had to be an attack on the problems of the weather, and we brought in enabling legislation for crop insurance and extended the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. Then we had to find new markets, so we started a program of accelerated sales. I could go on and on. This afternoon the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) was extolling how the Liberal party is the friend of the farmer, and yet when I go to the Bank of Canada report I see on page 33 that farm cash income and

The Budget-Mr. Slogan accrued net farm income has levelled off considerably in growth this year. Surely the farmers of Canada, who this year have done so much for the economy, deserve a better deal from the government.
In our part of the country we have had a severe crop failure this year. I have had a question on the order paper asking what the government intends to do to assist, but it has not been answered, probably because the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) is not around. A lot of farmers in our area cannot afford to buy their seed grain this year, and there again the federal government has refused to be of assistance. This is only typical of the Liberal party in its approach to the problems of the nation.
Now a word about devaluation of the dollar. As the former minister of agriculture said, the campaign of the Liberal party on the devaluation of the dollar was the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the people of Canada because, while the Liberals did not believe that devaluation was not a good thing for Canada, they led the people of Canada to believe it was not. I say that, because if they had believed it was not good they would certainly have done something to restore the premium on the dollar.
But what has devaluation done? Even for the farmer it has meant a 15 cents a bushel increase in price of wheat on world markets. It has increased our competitive position and the position of our exports. I have mentioned what was done with our international balance of payments. For the first time in our history we have a positive balance in our tourist trade, and for this again devaluation of the dollar is largely responsible. It also has meant a decrease of imports into the country, because devaluation has made our domestic products more competitive with the products from low wage countries. To be honest, I think the Minister of Finance and the politicians of the Liberal party should welcome devaluation and should say it was a good thing for Canada; that they have misled the people of Canada and that the policy of the Conservative government at that time was a proper one. I also say that in order to attain the goals we need in our economy, if it is necessary to devaluate the dollar further, then I am in favour of it. Many countries in the world have devaluated their currency. For example, the British pound was $5, and see what it is today. A devaluation of 7J per cent is nothing drastic; it has done a lot of good for the economy, and if further devaluation would do more good, I would be in favour of it.
Now I want to deal with a more noncontroversial subject about which I wish to express some views which perhaps do not


reflect the opinions of other members of the house on either side. As a young man I am not so preoccupied with the past as with the conditions of the present and the prospects for the future. If we are to progress in this country there is room for improvement everywhere. Perhaps we could start right here in this chamber. As members of parliament, we have basic shortcomings. I think we are very pragmatic in our approach to the problems of the country, have an insatiable fear of the electorate and are also very reticent to take a stand on anything but the most non-controversial problems.
I think we are followers rather than leaders in this country. In this day and age, people expect their members of parliament to be leaders. I believe that, as a central government in this country, we must resolve to make the federal government a more effective instrument not only on the home front but amongst the nations of the world. We must inspire amongst Canadians a respect for the government and patriotism in this country, which I think is disintegrating at this time. I believe that, as trustees of Canada, it is our duty to establish unity and opportunity for all Canadians from whatever section of Canada, from whatever racial background or from whatever economic conditions they may come.
It is the duty of the federal government to assist the weak, to restrain the strong, to instil in the average Canadian a greater sense of duty and a greater destiny for Canada. I think we must become partners, too, with all the other levels of government, with all the segments of our economy. This makes for progress and for a modern, enthusiastic society. To a large measure, this philosophy is embodied in the philosophies of the political parties and in the philosophy of the Conservative party which can be described very simply as the vision to create and the courage to retain, and in the words of the motto of our party, which is "opportunity, security and freedom".
If we are going to do something about the problem, it is not enough to just define it. I think we must study the methods which will correct what we lack in our economy today. It is necessary to give vitality to this country, which seems to be lacking, just as we did in 1957 with that vision of the north, the new frontier and the great national development policy we brought into effect. Hon. members should recall that we started the roads to resources program. The present Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) said we were building roads from igloo to igloo. I think all members on the other side will regret that phrase. This was reminiscent of the

defeatist Grit opposition in the early days when we were building railways, as they said, from wigwam to wigwam. This is not the type of vision or outlook we want in Canada. We want a vision that is going to bring greater progress to Canada than we have at the moment.
As I said, we could start in the House of Commons itself because I believe that in approaching problems in this house we are often archaic. We are often ineffective. We spend a lot of money and time uselessly. I welcome, therefore, the reconvening of the committee on rules. I only hope that they will have some amendments to bring forth which will make the government more effective without in any way restraining the opposition in their rights to criticize the government.
I feel, too, we need to reconvene a federal-provincial conference with a view to redefining the areas of responsibility under the constitution. We have had the British North America Act for almost 100 years, and it has served us well. But, more and more, we see that there is duplication in government which I believe leads to a waste of money. This duplication has built a government too large to be effective. I think that by redefining the areas of responsibility of the various governments we will be doing a service to Canada. If we can also encourage amongst the provinces something that has been started already, we will be doing a service. I refer to horizontal association, and by that I mean the provinces themselves getting together in those areas of activity which are distinctly the responsibilities of the provinces. The provinces should not have to come to the federal government in connection with responsibilities which are strictly those of the provinces.
These days we hear a lot of talk about co-operative federalism. In those areas where responsibility is shared, I think it is going to be necessary to have closer links with the provinces. Certainly, the record of the former Conservative government in this regard was an admirable one. The principle we have to follow is that the government that is going to spend the money must take the responsibility of levying the taxes. I do not believe demands can be made on the federal treasury all the time unless those who are going to spend the money take the responsibility for levying the taxes. This federal government, during the short time it has been in power, has failed in a lot of respects in relation to its responsibilities with the provinces. I think it has failed and, at the same time, it has weakened the strength of the central government. I do not believe any province
The Budget-Mr. Slogan should hope to establish itself as an equal of the federal government. In the interests of a strong, united Canada, the central government must remain strong and must remain dominant. This has been the policy of the Conservative party since confederation and I think it is still the policy of the Conservative party.
I hope that the Liberal party will not be doing the things it has been doing to create disunity in the country. I want to refer for a moment to the royal commission on bicul-turalism and bilingualism. Since the establishment of this commission I have noticed that in many parts of Canada people who normally had the greatest good will toward the province of Quebec are becoming irritated. A lot of this good will is being lost. I believe these people resent the manner in which the extremists of that province are presenting their problems. In this regard, I feel communications media have a great responsibility. This is one area in which I think they have failed. They have failed the people of Canada, and they have failed their own profession by giving undue attention to that small portion of the population which holds these extreme views and playing them up in the newspapers, on television and radio. I feel the communications media, too, has a responsibility in connection with uniting this country and in connection with building a greater Canada. Statements have been made by people like Rene Levesque and even our present Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Mr. Tremblay). I think when the minister refers to members of this house and the traditions in this house in a way which would exclude some members-and I would be one of them-from positions in the house, he is making the type of statement that does not make for unity and harmony in this country.
I believe a study needs to be made in this area, but certainly a more positive approach could be used than by coining artificial words such as "biculturalism" and "bilingualism" which, by their connotation, spread abroad the idea of the lack of an integral whole. Through the intervening time since confederation, Canadians as a whole have been taught to be tolerant and to respect the views of all. Regardless of their background, they have been taught to be proud of their distinctive contribution to our culture. Terms such as mosaic, flower garden, rainbow and other such apt phrases have been applied to the distinctive blending and fine harmony that has been reached in the Canadian culture. We in the Conservative party are distinctly proud of our promotion of the idea of unhyphenated Canadianism. Canadians today, individually, should be proud enough to assert their status

The Budget-Mr. Slogan as Canadians, without being relegated to first, second or third class Canadians, as much of the publicity surrounding the commission on biculturalism and bilingualism has done inadvertently.
In the few minutes I have left, I want to come back to what I believe the Liberal party can do in order to attain some of these objectives which they have set for themselves and which they have failed to attain. I believe that what we need in Canada is what I would call "A Canada charter-a partnership for progress". This would be a partnership between the federal government and the other levels of government, a partnership between government and the other segments of the economy. First of all, I think it is up to the federal government to be the leader in this respect. It is up to the federal government, if we are to prosper, to relate the segments of economy. It is up to the federal government to define the goals specifically and then plan for their attainment. I believe every effort must be put forward toward recruiting other aspects of our economy in the attainment of these goals.
The minister did mention some of these goals in passing. He referred to increased employment, increased growth, expanded trade and stable prices. There are others such as a sound immigration policy and the guarantee of a minimum standard of living for those of our people who through no fault of their own, are unable to participate as fully as other Canadians do in our prosperity.
Perhaps it would be good for us to look at these goals a little more closely. Basically we are a free enterprise economy and it is our goal to maintain that free enterprise economy because at least in the field of agriculture we can say today that democracy with its freedom is a far superior way of life to that behind the iron curtain. When we consider that the very small proportion of our population in Canada which is engaged in agriculture is producing great surpluses compared with the very large percentage of the population in the Soviet union engaged in agriculture, and failing to produce enough to feed the population of that country, then certainly this is one area where the free enterprise system is more efficient.
I think one of the partnerships we must look to, as well as partnership of the various levels of government, is the partnership of labour, management and government. It is obvious that labour, management and government each has a role to play in attaining these goals. The leader in the attaining of prosperity must be the government, and it is up to us to establish a partnership for progress with each sector of the economy.


In my view we must co-operate with labour to guarantee to the worker a decent minimum wage. I think we must encourage a sound wage structure that will give the worker a decent standard of living. I think we must see that labour is free and responsible in collective bargaining. I think labour must be a partner in increasing efficiency and productivity. In return I think that management too can do something for labour by instituting profit sharing schemes and by making available to their workers equity shares in industry. I think that workers should be proud enough of the company for which they work to invest in it by buying equity shares. In this way they would be investing in the future of their own industry and in Canada as a whole.
At the same time there are responsibilities that labour must accept. Labour must accept the responsibility of not crippling essential industries by irresponsible strikes. There must be freedom for the individual within the labour movement. There must be the largest scope of autonomy for Canadian unions. Unrealistic wage demands that create unstable prices must be avoided. I think that, more than in the past, management and labour must work together, assess their common goals and work harmoniously to achieve them, because only in this way can we achieve a larger share of the world market where our prosperity really lies.
In my view management and industry should be able to look to the government for the proper climate and opportunity for expansion. Management must avoid unsound price advances. Technological advances must be coupled with concern for human displacement. Most of all, industry must be concerned with increasing trade abroad. As one of our ministers said, they had better get off their fannies and sell.
With regard to management and industry, governments must be vigilant to protect displaced workers and to discourage unsound price advances that affect those on fixed incomes and hurt our competitive position abroad. We must be vigilant in our protection and encouragement of small businesses against combines and cartels which eliminate competition.
The government must realize also that following the devastation by war a large portion of European industries has set up new plants, which have become more competitive. Therefore there must be tax incentives for our industries in order that they may improve their plants and place themselves in a competitive position. At a time when European costs are rising, I think that such incentives would do a great deal for Canadian industry.

We in the Conservative party initiated loans to small businesses, a departure from previous years. We expanded export-import insurance. We convened the greatest trade promotion conference in Canadian history. These are some of the things which the Liberal party could emulate.
1 want to refer for a moment to the national debt because actually what we are doing by the vast increase in the national debt is mortgaging future generations of Canadians.
I think the national debt should be of real concern to every Canadian. In an article in the Ottawa Journal I noticed it was estimated that the federal debt went up by $50 for each Canadian in the past year, which is twice the rise of recent years on a per capita basis. The total national debt stands at something like $15,136 million or $789.10 per capita. Perhaps a better way of assessing the impact of the debt on the economy is to realize that in every family with two children the breadwinner is saddled with a mortgage of $3,156.40 and that it is costing the breadwinner of every family with two children $216.44 to pay the carrying charges on the national debt, which this year will amount to $1,038 million. If the government would make the people aware of this fact I think there would certainly be more co-operation with regard to the demand for a balanced budget and a reduction in the national debt to free money that could be invested in the national economy.
In my opinion, continuing deficits will only aggravate the situation. Balancing the budget and reducing the national debt at this time of relative prosperity would do a great deal to free money and make it available for capital investment in the country. I am not saying that deficits are not indicated in certain instances. For example, in a time of recession such as we inherited from the Liberal government, although personal savings in the banks were at an all time high-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. I regret to have to interrupt the hon. member but his time has expired.


Mr. T. S. Barnett (Comox-Alberni):: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that the hon. member's interesting remarks on the national debt had to be interrupted. If the 1963 budget of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) could be described as a time bomb which blew up in his face with a loud bang, I think one can only say that the sound that came forth from the present budget was the equivalent of the small plop when a cork is withdrawn from a bottle. While the minister may attempt to describe the contents of the bottle
The Budget-Mr. Barnett to us as vintage champagne, I am afraid that to many of us it tastes more like stale soda water.
However, I really do not wish to concern myself for any length of time with what I would term the superficialities of the budget, but rather I should like to suggest that when a Liberal minister of finance brings down a budget we see Liberal government revealed in its true colours. We see that when it comes to the pinch the Liberal party and the Liberal government always seem to come down firmly on the side of the exploiters and not the exploited. While it may be true that they try to cover up this situation with a few small sops thrown to the people at large, such as the minor extension in family allowances, nevertheless as far as I am concerned this is the basic situation which the budget presented by the amiable Minister of Finance has revealed to us.
I know it is quite true that we who sit here in the House of Commons as members of the New Democratic party often find ourselves giving at least partial approval to many of the proposals which the Liberal government brings forward, proposals, for example, such as the rather fragmentary Canada pension plan or the proposal to send a peace keeping force to Cyprus. However, we in this party are committed to a very different basic point of view so far as the purpose and function of a budget in our government and society are concerned.
I note too from time to time we find ourselves agreeing and quite rightly saying that some of the ministers are doing a good job in administering their departments. I think many of the ministers would agree that we in the N.D.P. are quite prepared to co-operate with them in the proper sense of the term, as members of parliament., in assisting them to do an efficient job of administering the normal affairs of government. But the house, the Minister of Finance and the government should not be misled, by that seeming pleasantry on occasion on our part, into any idea that we find ourselves agreeing in any fundamental way with the government in power.
The occasion of the presentation of the budget is one when we should certainly try to stand up in the house and make ourselves clear on this point. We also find among hon. members opposite, who officially support the government, many nice, well-meaning, idealistic people. They are some of the best examples of do-gooders in our society, and the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Hahn) who spoke a little earlier, is an excellent example of that sort of person. They are the people who, from time to time, bring modest pressure on the government to introduce

The Budget-Mr. Barnett measures designed to improve public health, to improve the situation of the aged, and to help keep the ill from starving.
They have strong humanitarian impulses, and I freely admit this. We in the New Democratic party share those humanitarian impulses with them; but when budget time comes, and with the customary pomp and ceremony the Minister of Finance stands up to deliver his speech, time after time we find we still have a government that is wedded to the philosophy of the jungle law, where the strong are allowed to eat the weak, and that all the humanitarian impulses of the do-gooders have not got us very far.
To illustrate that point I would like to read a portion of a letter which I received from one of my constituents. It says:
Dear Mr. Barnett:
I may sound very bitter to you but I've reason to be so. Dr. Peterson sees me every two weeks, and he told me he was doing all he could for me, the only thing was new lungs, an operation that can't be done, lungs are gone with bronchitis, some days I can hardly walk with one leg having chronic trouble.
The board in Vancouver turned me down because I can feed myself with a spoon and go to toilet myself.
They are being bribed by someone-
I am not suggesting that I agree with her reasoning, but I can understand her feelings.
-to not give it to me in hopes that by next year I won't need it and will be dead.
There is an example of the kind of situation that I feel very well illustrates the basic position taken by the government of Canada over the years. This woman is partly blind but she is not blind enough to qualify for a blind pension. I know this because I tried my best to get it for her. She is physically disabled but is not disabled enough to qualify for a disabled person's allowance. So she must go along, eking out the barest and most miserable of existences, and I cannot blame her when she comes to the conclusion that boards and governments are just sitting down hoping that before next year she will be dead.
Another example of the fact that in a country as wealthy as Canada we still have a government wedded to the philosophy of the jungle law is the Canada pension plan, which was introduced with such a flourish in this house. As I say, it is something which we in this party will be supporting, but we should not let it go unnoted that as it is proposed it leaves completely unanswered the problems of all the people who will retire during the next ten years in the period the plan is coming into operation. The government will be quite content to let the law of the jungle apply and allow those people to die off in misery and semi-starvation.

Every time the Liberal government unveils a new budget we find the situation remains where the rich will continue to get richer and the poor will continue to get poorer in terms of the productive capacity of the country's economy. I shall not belabour statistics, but anyone who sits down and analyses the figures which are put out in reams by the dominion bureau of statistics can easily see that this is borne out by the facts. Each time a new budget is introduced we find that the ever encroaching monopoly of corporate interests is being encouraged to expand its near dictatorial control over the lives of its wage slaves.
Some hon. members may say that "wage slaves" is a pretty old-hat sort of term which went out with the nineteenth century. Well, Mr. Speaker, any hon. members who really try to understand the problems faced from day to day by the working people, who carry the burden of the sweat and toil, must understand the encircling influences put around them by so many of the employing interests in this country, and will have to agree that the term "wage slaves", far from being old-hat, is becoming more and more true and in a much more insidious fashion than it was in the nineteenth century.
When I use this term I am not referring only to the so-called blue collar workers. I am referring even more to the brains that are hired by these modern corporate dictatorships. I can give one example which happened in my own constituency within the last year.
It concerns a capable office worker for a certain company. He had one son who was a student at the University of British Columbia. This man and his wife displayed some interest in the public affairs of the country, which took the form of general support for my candidacy, and when this happened the powers that be in the company went to the man's wife and told her that if she and her husband did not cease and desist there would be no summer employment for her son, employment which had been promised him. If that sort of thing does not constitute a form of wage slavery, then I really do not know what does. I am sure many high-minded members on the opposite side of the house would agree with me that this is not the sort of thing which should be tolerated; but the question is, what are they prepared to do about it?
Just what does the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) do when he enunciates the basic financial and economic policies of the government? These infringements upon civil liberties, these infringements upon the freedom of the mind, these enslavements of Canadian citizens are allowed to go on virtually unchallenged in the name of free enterprise. This is one of the matters on

which members of the New Democratic party And themselves in fundamental disagreement with the government, and with policies and proposals of the kind which are brought forward by the Minister of Finance when he stands up and delivers his budget speech.
Everyone agrees that in a complex industrial society discipline in the productive process is necessary. But we in this party maintain that those who do the controlling and the directing must be responsible for their actions to those who are controlled, if human freedom is to have any meaning, if slavery of the mind and exploitation of the human body and brain are to be brought to an end. This is the state of affairs, however, against which the budgetary policies of the government do not lift even a little finger. Indeed, this particular budget makes it clear that such autocracy is to be continued and even extended.
The budget itself provides one of those occasions when the real difference between those satisfied, well-meaning, do-gooding Liberals and those who subscribe to the social democratic philosophy becomes apparent. The New Democratic party is the only party in Canada which has as a conscious aim the bringing to an end of the exploitation of man by man. We who sit in this house now, and those who will succeed us in the years ahead, will not rest until exploitation has been eliminated from our society. The government and its followers and all the exponents of so-called free enterprise in this country assume that the mainspring of progress must forever be the law of the jungle, with the redness of tooth and claw kept decently out of sight as far as possible. They are content, for the most part, to introduce measures which merely make the fur over the claws a little thicker and a little glossier. Sometimes they even attempt to train the tigers to keep their claws drawn behind the fur. On other occasions they make an attempt to file off the ends of the claws a little so as to blunt them if they do protrude. Then, of course, on occasions, Liberal governments and those who think very much like them, do attempt to add a strand or two to the feeble leashes which are designed to hold the tiger in check; in other words, they bring in such legislation as the combines legislation, the labour laws and the marketing legislation designed to help the farmers. By and large we support these actions because we are humanitarians, too. But let the government know, and let the people of Canada know that we are not satisfied with this sort of thing alone. Specifically, and in direct reference to the budget we are discussing, we disagree completely with the comfortable, complacent "all's well with the world"
The Budget-Mr. Barnett attitude expressed by the minister in his budget speech. Our want of confidence in this government's budget is complete.
Let me make it clear, however, that our want of confidence is not simply a matter of demanding an election this year or next year. We in this party are quite prepared to accept the verdict of the electorate as it is rendered from time to time in general elections. But we do reserve our right to continue to expose the realities of the situation. This budget is really no different from last year's or from that of the year before. It is no different from any budget delivered by a minister of finance in this house in the last 10, 20, 30 or 50 years. All of them have been weighted in favour of the privileged. All of them have encouraged more people in this country to become bloodsucking leeches in our society.
One of the anomalies, I think, of our history is the fact that the only Canadian prime ministers who have shown any signs of radicalism since the first world war have been Conservatives. Mr. R. B. Bennett was going to blast his way into the markets of the world during the depression. The hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker) was going to blast unemployment off the map. Neither of them got very far, and this was because neither of them subscribed to a philosophy which could provide them with a reasoned follow through in policy. And, for that matter, neither of them had a parliamentary army which would have followed them had they tried to do that sort of thing.


William Heward Grafftey: How do you know?


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I suppose the truth of the matter is that when I stand up and make this speech I have very little hope of convincing the amiable Minister of Finance over there of the error of his ways.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Just a big tiger.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I hope I have not sounded too wrathful in my denunciation of the hon. gentleman's budget. I must say that if I do feel some wrath it was heightened this year by the failure of the minister to make even the feeblest effort to resolve some of the income tax problems which were discussed last year affecting those who make the greatest effort to provide themselves with income-those who live on salaries and wages. I did have some small hope after the discussion which took place last year that proposals would be made in this year's budget to deal with the grievances which were raised; that there might, indeed, be some proposal to amend section 5 in an appropriate way so as to provide for expenses incurred by those in receipt of wages and salaries. I have been arguing this matter

The Budget-Mr. Pilon in the house since I first came here in 1953, and I suppose if I am here in 1973 and the Minister of Finance is still over there I shall probably still be arguing it. Just for the record I will read one of many letters that I have received on this subject from constituents in recent weeks. This letter is addressed to me, and it says:
I am writing to you, as my elected member of parliament for Comox-Alberni, regarding desired amendments to the Income Tax Act.
Because I am a logger I had to pay out a total of $204.40 in fares last year in getting back and forth to my place of employment. These fares were not paid for holidays but because the operation is closed seasonally. While I was in camp I had to pay board and lodging costs of $536.50. This is a huge sum when you consider that I am at the same time paying $65.00 per month house rent plus additional costs for my own family dwelling elsewhere. Special logging clothes; work boots; hard hat and a rubber rain suit cost me $100 last year.
Please note I have not included cost of regular working clothes which in logging are subject to rapid wear and tear.
As a logging truck driver employed in a logging camp, I not only have the above costs to contend with, but also find that I have an annual cost of $90 replacing broken or worn out tools. I am also finding that every month I am buying some tool to do required maintenance on the new machinery that is coming into my camp. In accepting a job as a truck driver I am required to supply my own tools, so that my fare to camp is increased by $25 every time that my place of employment is changed.
I would like to point out that with recent increases in salaries to M.P.'s, $6,000 was made to be tax free. This money alone is more than I am able to gross each year.
Would you please tell me what steps you have taken or will take during the current session to grant me some relief from this unfair burden.
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly the question I would like to direct to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon), who is in a much better position-


Douglas Mason Fisher: He doesn't care.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: -to answer than I am as to what can effectively be done or will effectively be done in this connection. Even if there had been only one little gesture to the people who incur these expenses regularly in the course of earning a fairly modest livelihood, I would have felt a little happier with the budget which the minister has introduced. The only income tax gesture which people such as the man who has written to me are apt to hear much about is that nice little gesture in the minister's proposals to increase to 50 per cent from 30 per cent the annual depreciation allowance on mobile earthmoving equipment. Some of these men will be carting the tools that will be used to repair that equipment from time to time.
So in closing all I can say, in despair of convincing the minister, to those humanitarian members who sit along the back benches

across the way and like to talk so loudly about how they want to see greater justice and how they want to see poverty removed is, "Shame on you. How can you go on supporting a government which brings in the kind of budget introduced by the present Minister of Finance?"


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The hon. member for Chambly-Rouville (Mr. Pilon).


Stanley Howard Knowles: Now one of them stands up to confess his shame.


Mr. Bernard Pilon (Chambly-Rouville):: Mr. Speaker, I must congratulate the Minister of Finance for presenting a budget which is as realistic as it is practical. This year, the emphasis was put on our young people, those who will be called up to play an important role in the economic structure of our country, that generation which will have to face new obstacles and a more advanced civilization, a more complex economic system and more strained relations within confederation.
Mr. Speaker, the figures and statistics given in the budget reflect a sound and growing economy and also show a new vitality, injected by a Liberal policy conceived by clearsighted and practical businessmen, with the means at our disposal.
The evil of unemployment, in spite of a marked improvement is still an important problem in some eastern sections of the country. It is obvious that in the near future, the steps taken last year and this year will have some beneficial effects. Afterwards, we may enjoy considerably improved conditions and this will greatly contribute to improve our standard of living.
Mr. Speaker, the budget is based on carefully thought out objectives, as mentioned by the minister. Creation of new jobs, steps taken to make sure that the jobs will be filled by well-qualified persons, development and improved economic levels, based on the foresight and ability of our business men, our federal, provincial and municipal authorities.
Our foreign trade has fallen off from 1958 to 1962 and it is essential to regain the share of international markets to which we are entitled. It must be acknowledged that we had been pushed back to the fifth place in that field, whereas in 1957, we were in second place. Every section of our country benefited from this economic recovery. As I said earlier, several factors must be taken into account, more especially our domestic and external markets, our wheat exports, which helped our highway and railway systems, as well as our air transport system. We broke our own records, even in the western provinces where

the recovery was more pronounced thanks to the sustained contribution of our railway systems.
At the outset of my remarks, I said that young people in every part of Canada, those who will eventually replace us later on, will reap the benefits of our legislation. In connection with what I have just said, I should like to emphasize what the late John F. Kennedy said to a group of young people:
What is important, it is not what our country is doing for us, but what we are doing for our country.
At this stage, Mr. Speaker, I should not like to bore the house by quoting figures and statistics already published and that my honourable colleagues are likely to have seen. I should like now to bring out a point with regard to our constructive legislation.
1.	Assistance will be given to our students by way of income tax relief and family allowances;
2.	The granting of scholarships. The Liberal party platform mentioned the fact that no Canadian would be deprived of an education for financial reasons. I should like also to emphasize the fact that a new department will give leadership to agricultural classes.
Mr. Speaker, may I mention a few facts which will influence the economic outlook of my riding of Chambly-Rouville: the changes with regard to the St. Hubert air station which will be transferred from the Department of National Defence to the Department of Transport.
One of the important industries in my riding had a record year in 1963. The 3 million bushels of apples harvested in the St. Hilaire and Rougemont area were sold quickly and profitably, thanks to new markets, and there was an increase of 30 per cent over the preceding year.
In another field, that of construction, some 800 new home owners, I did say 800, were added to the already long list of those who benefited from C.M.H.C. loans. A piece of legislation passed last year greatly helped the home owners and the building contractors, which reduced unemployment and gave a new impetus to our building materials industry and the sale of lots generally.
I would like to urge both the Minister of Labour (Mr. MacEachen) and the minister responsible for C.M.H.C. to extend the period during which this grant of $500 is allowed, in order that those eligible for it may take advantage of it. The period from November to March is rather short, considering the demand. Our suppliers of materials and C.M.H.C., in spite of every effort, have not been able to cope with the general demand. Statistics show that the building industry has become vitally important during the past
The Budget-Mr. Martineau few years. New building contractors have undertaken colossal projects and have acquired the necessary experience to carry them out. They have put the accent on quality of industrial designs and have helped to revive the building materials trade. They have contributed to improve the standard of our skilled workers and have given Canadians houses worthy of them.
I hope that all right thinking Canadians throughout this country will unite so that Canada will not be broken up. On the other hand, claims from the province of Quebec must not be ignored; that province is ready to co-operate provided its constitutional rights are restored and its identity is preserved.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure that we shall reach this goal during the year and that we shall give the lie to the extremists' expectations. I believe in a country made up of confederative states, the economy of which is one. We shall find our strength in our differences, having our eyes fixed upon one goal: Canadian unity based upon equal rights.

The Liberal party, Mr. Speaker, has made a pledge, and I want this house to rest assured that we believe in unity and that with the understanding of this great nation this goal will be reached, to the benefit of all Canadians.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Speaker, it is a bit late. You will no doubt allow me then to show some kindness. I will start by congratulating the hon. member who has just resumed his seat. He deserves some credit for his speech, but mostly for its brevity.
I also wish to be kind to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon); I know that he deserves it. He must be tired by this debate which has not gone too well for him because I think that very few nice things have been said about his masterpiece, last week's budget.
However, Mr. Speaker, I noticed that the minister is concerned about several groups of citizens. For instance, he worried about the free entry of sacramental bread; that is something in his favour. On the other hand, he recommended the repeal of the provisions concerning the size of whisky bottles. Finally, in order that nobody would be neglected, he amended the tariff on disinfectants, fungicides and insecticides. Consequently, everyone should be satisfied.
One might think that the minister wants to be considered as a humourist. He had already displayed his talent of humourist and actor last year when he was busy pursuing the skeletons which he said were hidden away in the taxation closet. But a year has passed

The Budget-Mr. Martineau and he does not seem to have found any; he took care not to use these terms which he has stricken from his vocabulary since the notorious events which occurred after June 13, 1963.
If I will be permitted to use a well-worn turn of phrase, I would say that the minister turned himself into a mouse this year. So as not to offend him I hasten to say that I am merely making a metaphor; not for a single minute would I think of comparing his physical appearance to that of a mouse. That is not at all what I mean. Considering the apologetic attitude he took when he introduced this production of his, we, on this side of the house, cannot help make such a comparison. Indeed, he pretended to table a budget but he did not quite make it. One would need Diogenes' lantern to find in that document anything that vaguely resembles a budget.


An hon. Member:: You mean Theogene.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Diogenes; not Theogene.
I wonder why he was so shy of showing us his masterpiece. Would it be for fear of offending some of his colleagues, those, for instance-we find some on the front benches who want to keep things as they are. Among the most prominent cabinet members, there are some who almost faint every time changes are suggested. However, if there is someone who may be informed about those matters, surely it is the minister, because we know how his most fervent supporters last year made him the target of their criticisms. Maybe he did not want to offend them. Or then again his shyness might have been due to the fact that, this year, he missed the experts who had come from Detroit and Toronto?
This year, the minister has become a supporter of orthodoxy.
He makes a high-sounding statement of policy. Since the budget is a top secret document, according to tradition, he did not deem advisable to call upon outsiders to take part in its preparation. Hurray for the minister. He is beginning to understand. His timidity might be explained by the fact that, even though he looks grave, he is not fully recovered from the shock he suffered last year when he served us that hotchpotch; maybe he tasted it and found it indigestible. Even though he succeeded in swallowing certain items in that budget, certain ingredients of this hotchpotch, it is possible that they are not completely digested.
And while saying this, I am thinking of the tax on building materials and we are still stuck with it. The same applies to his budget especially as he was under the influence of the ides of March, a period of the year which can be full of unexpected phenomenoms and


effects. The minister, scared to death, apologetic and moreover superstitious, even if he says that he is not, presented that masterpiece which I could qualify as a masterpiece of the status quo. And to the house full of anticipation and somewhat apprehensive on account of a past experience, he introduced his freak, this abortive budget. After being an innovator, the minister has become the most eager partisan of the status quo which could be found.
No wonder, therefore, that most hon. members remained dumbfounded at such a display.
On the other hand, I think that the initial surprise and the first moment of amazement having worn off, the inscrutible minister should be asked some questions. Several come to my mind. We could ask the minister why he did not think it appropriate, this year, to abolish his tax on building materials, and production machinery? If he could not abolish it or cancel it altogether, he should at least have prevented it from rising to 8 per cent. Why did he not seize his courage with both hands as he did last year, when as if he had just awakened from a deep slumber, he announced that the full tax would not become effective for some time?
Last year, the minister found as an excuse for this retreat the fact that this tax was "administratively difficult to apply". Therefore, I ask the minister whether this year it became a "administratively easy to apply"? I also ask whether the confusion this tax created in the building field and that of business in general has now completely vanished?
Judging from the briefs from all sections of the country that the minister is still receiving and of which humble hon. members get copies, this confusion still exists, and the builders are still in a state of acute uncertainty because after stocking huge quantities of building materials, etc., in order to avoid the payment of this tax, those people are asking the minister for explanations, but he maintains the same stubborn silence as he did these last few months on that matter.
The minister refuses to see the light and bring the required relief to one of the basic industries of our country, on which depend full employment and the general prosperity of our nation.
At the end of the budget debate, the minister might give us a few answers in this respect.
Now, along other lines, I might ask the minister why he looked after certain special classes of people and why he could not find means to help farmers?
It is true that in reply to a question put to him by some one from this side of the

house, he asked: do they not have any children? Yes, Mr. Speaker, farmers do have children, but they also have particular problems. They are part of one of our country's basic industries. The minister showed a complete lack of interest in the situation of that large segment of our population, whose wheat production especially is now making a substantial contribution towards the solution of one of the problems facing our hon. friends opposite and which he recognizes as the most important, that is the balance of our international payments.
There is nothing in the budget for the farmers; nothing for the worker; nothing for the businessman; and finally no provisions to facilitate property ownership by the people generally. The right of ownership is a basic principle of the Conservative party and it is by favouring ownership that we will be able to preserve our system of free enterprise. The minister did not say one word in this connection. He showed complete indifference, even a hostile attitude towards all those classes of society. I ask him to tell us why?
Why has the budget no provisions to alleviate unemployment? Nevertheless, he is the one who was in favour of full employment in the talks he gave throughout the country, in his programs on television and radio, in his publications and pamphlets, as well as in his famous book. He was supposed to be the one to accomplish this feat of strength.
Today, you can notice his timorous attitude concerning the problem which is at present the most serious one facing the Canadian economy, according to the Prime Minister himself.
At present, there are 400,000 or 500,000 unemployed in Canada. Why is the minister not doing something about it, instead of merely pointing out that the situation is improving? There has been, he said, an improvement.
This improvement is really something fantastic, when one considers the average rate of unemployment, which had risen to 5.9 per cent last year and has now fallen to 5.5 per cent, and this, thanks, as they say-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Paul Raymond Martineau: -Yes, Mr. Speaker, these gentlemen may well applaud and even smile and make fun of the 400,000 or 500,000 unemployed in this country at this time. But, as I said, if there has been such a microscopic, such a tiny improvement, it is due mainly, as it has been very well recognized, to the dollar devaluation which was, in itself, an initiative that saved Canada. It is also due to the sale of wheat to communist countries, a policy-
The Budget-Mr. Martineau


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Those gentlemen's cheers are quite in order, Mr. Speaker. As I was saying, a policy launched by those on this side of the house and especially the former minister of agriculture. The Canadian people know what to think about that.
And again, what does the minister intend to do about our balance of payments? Oh, he talks, he makes commendable and pious statements. La Palice himself declared:
We must restore the balance of our payments. We must definitely do it, but what the minister does not say is how we are going to do it. As a matter of fact, he does not give us any indication on this point. He probably thinks that his lucky star, which has for some time shined on high, but which is not as bright at the moment will help him. I have closely examined his budget, but have not found a single solid proposal in it.
What does the minister intend to do, for example, to free this country from public debt charges? In fact, public debt services, for last year and this year, exceed $1 billion. You have there, Mr. Speaker, an astronomical amount, twice as large as the total budget for 1939 and for the sole purpose of paying the interest on the public debt. Nowadays, the federal administration costs twice as much as in 1939.
That is a serious situation which deserves consideration and I am sure the minister is thinking about it. However, he seems to have adopted a do-nothing attitude which is not customary with him and which must surely discourage his best friends.
Mr. Speaker, I should like to know also what the minister intends to do concerning the control of our industry and our business by foreigners. Has he abandoned his aim which was to increase Canadian participation in our industry? Of course, we must not forget that he launched his policy rather clumsily last year when he hastily introduced half-baked measures that he withdrew just as fast. He is quite clear when he defines the objectives we must strive to reach, but when it comes to suggest means of doing so, his statements are most obscure.
He speaks of fiscal measures to achieve these objectives, but then he withdraws the withholding tax on dividends paid to nonresidents. Concerning the withdrawal of this tax, however difficult this action was for the minister, we must congratulate him for it, and we fully agree with him, because last year, one member after the other called for the withdrawal of this discriminatory tax which did not meet the purpose it was meant to. On the contrary.
But we cannot follow the argument of the minister when he gives his excuse for the

The Budget-Mr. Martineau withdrawal of this tax. He mentions vaguely the fact that taxes have been lowered in the United States. He speaks also of the American parent corporations which will pay only 48 per cent tax on their income in 1965, which is the equivalent of a 15 per cent withholding tax.
Mr. Speaker, if you have lost the thread of my argument, I do not blame you. It is precisely the point that I would like to make. You cannot understand me because I am using the very same words used by the Minister of Finance. That is why you do not follow my argument, and I wonder what he is talking about when he gives the reason or rather the excuse that this is a new factor, which is not true, since this concerns the corporate tax cut in the United States. As a matter of fact, it is not new because last year, or more precisely last June 13, when the minister brought down his budget, the U.S. senate had been asked to approve tax cuts. And I would like the minister to give us suitable explanations in that connection.
Mr. Speaker, there are several other questions which remained unanswered. And, in order to be objective, I must also direct other questions to the minister.
Why did he fail to take necessary steps in order to cut government expenditures? Why did he not see fit to cut taxes? And finally, why does he announce, for the fiscal year 1964-65, a deficit of nearly half a billion dollars?
Let us start by considering the matter of deficits. At the outset of his budget speech, the minister said that the economic climate had never been better. He saw everything through pink glasses and said that business was doing better and better.
In the past, the minister used to say that deficits could not be used except when the economy was slowing down. As a matter of fact, it is the theory of the pump primer. The Minister of National Health and Welfare (Miss LaMarsh) knows what is meant by the theory of the pump primer.
The minister said that we were entering upon an unprecedented era of prosperity. And yet, he predicted a deficit of half a
billion dollars. If the minister is unable to balance the budget when, according to him, we are living in an unprecedented era of prosperity, I wonder how he will ever manage to balance it. If the minister is the least consistent and logical-I know he is, but then he must have the courage to show it in his actions-in short, if his premises are sound, he should have introduced a balanced budget this year. Otherwise, his basic argument crumbles and the Canadian people can have no faith in his theories, because one cannot look at the dark and the bright side of everything at the same time. And yet, what the minister does not say is that he sees mostly red on account of a $500 million deficit.


An hon. Member:: Ten o'clock.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Speaker, I have a few remarks to make concerning tax cuts. We emphatically demand tax cuts. We, on this side of the house, are supporters of fiscal responsibility, and that is why we are asking for a relief in taxation. We know that taxation relief means renewed activity and an incentive for the whole economy, a stimulus for private enterprise, from which results a larger basis for taxation.
Mr. Speaker, may I call it ten o'clock?



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Gordon Minto Churchill: May I ask the house leader if there is any change forecast for tomorrow?


Guy Favreau: There are no changes forecast for tomorrow. We will be proceeding with the supplementary estimates, after which-


Walter Lockhart Gordon: The budget debate.


Guy Favreau: Oh, yes, that is what I meant, the budget debate tomorrow.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Status quo ante.


Guy Favreau: I was thinking in terms of Wednesday. I am living too fast, Mr. Speaker.


Stanley Howard Knowles: For a Liberal to be a day ahead is pretty fast.


[Stage Direction]
At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, March 24, 1964