1964-08-14

BANKING AND COMMERCE

[Stage Direction]
Seventh report of standing committee on banking and commerce-Mr. Pennell.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, could the Secretary of State for External Affairs tell the house whether Canada has received a request from the secretary general of the United Nations to provide additional troops for the UN Cyprus force, and what has been the reaction thereto? Furthermore, is he now in a position to advise on any developments that took place at the meeting of the nine participating countries with the secretary general? Would he at the same time give his observations to the house as to what he believes will be the effect on the already delicate negotiations for a peaceful settlement in Cyprus of the appointment of the guerrilla leader, General Grivas, as commander of the Cypriot national guard, especially in view of the fact that the United Nations commander has stated that General Grivas regards the United Nations peace force as "a bloody nuisance"?


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of Slate for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I have no comments to make at this time on the reported observation of General Grivas. With regard to the first part of my right hon. friend's question, there has been no formal request made to Canada for the supply of additional troops, although I believe General Thimayya has indicated he would like to see the United Nations forces brought up to the strength contemplated by the permissible limits under the security council resolution. At present Canada has 1,125 military personnel in Cyprus. Ours is the largest contingent in the United Nations force except for that supplied by Britain which is only slightly larger.
A meeting of the contributors took place yesterday at the United Nations. The Canadian ambassador expressed the view of the Canadian government that all possible measures should be taken to enhance the authority of the force so it would be in a more favourable position to carry out its assigned task. There will be further consultations, and I am confident that the position taken by the Canadian government is being urgently considered by the commander of the force.
In addition, Mr. Galo Plaza, a former president of Ecuador and a man of considerable experience in and outside the United Nations, is returning to Cyprus to carry on negotiations as the representative of the secretary general in discussions with the force commander as well as with the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot authorities. Admittedly the United Nations force, as the secretary general has publicly stated, is working within fairly circumscribed limits. Failing agreement in the security council and in addition the formal agreement of the Cypriot authorities, an extension of the powers of the force need not necessarily be expected. What we are doing is to maintain our representations to the United Nations authorities to ensure that all possible measures are pursued to enable the force to operate effectively within its present mandate.
From the report we received from our ambassador this morning I can say that the secretary general is determined to see that the principle of freedom of movement, as embodied in the exchange of notes between himself and the government of Cyprus, is established. To this end Mr. Galo Plaza as well as General Thimayya will be engaged in consultation with appropriate authorities.


John George Diefenbaker: May I ask a supplementary question. In view of the use of the words, which I took down, that the augmentation of the powers of the force ''need not necessarily be expected", may we take it that is a diplomatic way of saying there is going to be no increase in those powers? This expression is strangely reminiscent of the phrase "conscription if necessary, but not necessarily conscription." Do the words so carefully enunciated by the minister indicate that the force will continue to operate under
6812	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry powers that have proven insufficient for that force to properly discharge its responsibilities?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I would agree as to "insufficient", but it could not be argued that as a result of this insufficiency the United Nations is not playing a very important role in these very difficult circumstances. No; my hon. friend should not read anything into my language that was carefully conceived before being uttered. It simply means that we cannot, in this house, take unto ourselves powers which belong to the security council and which in turn can only be given effect to following agreement with the government of Cyprus. These are limitations that exist, and we will not further our objectives in this situation by failing to recognize them. Within those limitations I think my right hon. friend has now been informed of our intentions.


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquiilam):: May I ask a supplementary question in the light of reports that the secretary general of the United Nations is requesting the participating countries to supply additional troops for the peace keeping force in Cyprus. In the event that Canada is asked to do so, will this matter be referred to parliament before the request is complied with? Second, would the Canadian government make the supplying of additional Canadian troops contingent upon some amendment of the agreement of status to include provision for disarming guerrillas?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: I would not agree to such a condition, myself. This might be a desirable condition to impose in normal circumstances; but if it is not attainable, and if we were faced with the alternative of either having this condition accepted or of making no contribution to a situation that requires an international force, I would not be prepared to accept it even though this would be the easiest position to take.
With regard to the position of parliament concerning an increase in the numbers of the Canadian force, the resolution of this house authorizes the government to provide up to 1,200 men. If there were any disposition to go beyond that figure then of course we would have to come back to this house. I have pointed out that the Canadian contribution now is greater than that of any other of the participating countries except Britain. The secretary general and General Thimayya are undoubtedly giving consideration to the possibility of additional contributions of forces from others of the participating countries. I
[Mr. Diefenbaker.l

have suggested that they might give consideration to the inclusion of countries not now participating.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: As a further supplementary question, in view of the fact that the obstacle does not seem to lie with the security council of the United Nations but rather with the government of Cyprus, would the minister not agree that if additional forces are to be requested to protect the people of Cyprus, the very least Canada has a right to expect is the co-operation of the government of Cyprus in amending the agreement of status so as to make that force effective?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Of course Canada has the right to expect, and not only Canada but the whole world, that there will be this measure of co-operation; but this is something that depends on the government of Cyprus and possibly as well on other governments. However, I am sure my hon. friend did not intend to dismiss, as he did so summarily, the position of the security council. The force could not I think be augmented beyond the present 7,000 figure without the approval of the security council. There may be some hesitation in confronting the security council because of attitudes that could conceivably be taken by other countries. I am not saying that this situation would arise, but this may be in the mind of the secretary general.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: As one final supplementary question, has the security council at any time opposed the extension of the powers of the United Nations force in Cyprus?


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend and I are talking about two different things. He is talking about the extension of powers and I was talking about the increase in the numbers of military personnel. No, Mr. Speaker, there has been no public opposition by any member of the security council with regard to extension of the powers of the force, but it should be noted that the powers of the force were not specifically established by the security council. The secretary general himself was given the authority to negotiate for the powers which were required by the force.


Hon. Marcel Lambert (Edmonton West):: was intrigued by the distinction the minister has made with regard to the limitations on the powers of this parliament. I agree this parliament has no control over the security council as to the size of the force, but surely the minister would also agree that Canada has been the prime mover or the initiator or

the catalyst in setting up this peace keeping force, and that the views of this parliament as expressed in recent times with regard to its powers should certainly impress themselves upon all those concerned.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. gentleman and I are in full agreement about the role of parliament with regard to the force.


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Winnipeg South Centre):: I have a question for the Secretary of State for External Affairs related to the earlier question concerning Cyprus. I am asking simply for information. What methods or means are open to the minister to put before the security council Canada's desire with regard to strengthening United Nations force on the island, or extending its powers? Are we helpless in this regard even though we are the largest participant?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I would not agree that our views have been disregarded by the security council because, as I indicated earlier, the security council has at no time dealt with the question of the extension of powers or the principle of freedom of movement. These were matters involved in an exchange of notes between the secretary general and the government of Cyprus.
In any event, for some time Canada along with other countries, and particularly the participating countries, has been endeavouring to improve this situation by representations, together with the officials of the United Nations and with the commander of the force, all of whom have shared our concern. These are the limitations, but notwithstanding them we shall continue with these negotiations. The meeting yesterday was part of this effort, and the meetings that will be held within the course of the next few days with some of the participating countries have the same objective in view.


Gordon Minto Churchill: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. The minister has gone a bit beyond what I was asking. What means are open to the minister to make direct contact with the members of the security council in order to present the views that are held by this parliament on this question?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Of course, Mr. Speaker, there is open to the government direct contact with all the countries represented on the security council, where some of these negotiations have been carried on and appeals have been made. There is the opportunity for discussion open to our ambas-20220-431
Inquiries of the Ministry sador at the United Nations with his opposite numbers representing the members of the security council. Very active discussion is now going on between our ambassador, the ambassadors of the participating countries and the secretary general.


Gordon Minto Churchill: One final supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I take it, then, that there is no opportunity for, say, the minister himself, with his persuasive powers, to appear in person and sit in with the security council and present his views?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: I am sure my hon. friend was not serious, because, if that were so, the minister would have been there.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. May I ask the minister whether some of the misunderstanding is not partly due to to the statements which he made in this house on Wednesday, as reported at page 6716 of Hansard, when he pointed out that the extension of powers depended on two things; the security council, where the power of veto exists, and the agreement of the government of Cyprus. It is for that reason that these questions have been raised?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: I do not want to defend myself, Mr. Speaker, but I do not think questions arise in that way; because any increase in the total force could only come as a result of security council action. Any increase in the existing powers of the force, apart from personnel, is a matter that would arise out of negotiation between the secretary general and the government of Cyprus.



CANADIAN FLAG


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Maurice Cole (Chicoulimi):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the right hon. Prime Minister.
Would the Prime Minister tell the house whether he is still determined to hold on to his project for a three leaf flag in spite of the opposition of some members who still believe that they are living in the 19th century?


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: A discussion on this matter is going on now, and the position of the government has been made known.

Inquiries of the Ministry


John George Diefenbaker: Arising out of that, I read in the press with interest that the meeting on Tuesday which has been convened by the Prime Minister is for the purpose of offering the Leader of the Opposition and the leaders of third parties an alternative plan on the part of the government. What has been reported in the press gives all the indications of a well directed leak, and I ask the Prime Minister whether that is indeed the purpose of this meeting, and whether he intends to set aside the three maple leaves in favour of one leaf and to substitute the red ensign for the union jack in the submission he will be making at this meeting.


Lester Bowles Pearson: The request or the suggestion that this meeting be held was first made by an hon. member on the other side.


John George Diefenbaker: Who was he?


Lester Bowles Pearson: One of the right hon. gentleman's friends on the other side, the hon. member for St. Mary. I acknowledged that request and thought it would perhaps be useful to continue the discussions we had with the Leader of the Opposition and others the other day. At that time, as the right hon. gentleman will remember, it was agreed that there might be a further discussion. That discussion will take place on Tuesday. As far as I am aware there has been no leak at all as to the nature of the meeting.


John George Diefenbaker: I take it, then, the Prime Minister is telling the house that the information which has appeared in the press in this regard has no foundation, as far as his mind is concerned, as he addresses himself to the subject of the discussion.


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker. Not having read all the press comments on the meeting I am not in a position to confirm or deny what has been said in the press, but I hope the meeting will be a useful one and that we shall be able to consider the parliamentary situation in the light of the discussion now going on.


John George Diefenbaker: That shows it was a leak. [Translation]


Mr. Georges Valade (St. Mary):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the right hon. Prime Minister?
Would the Prime Minister tell us whether, in the course of those discussions, the question of the flag design, the choice of design itself, will come up?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I have no idea what my colleagues the leaders of the other parties will bring up for discussion at this meeting.


Mr. Eric A. Winkler (Grey-Bruce):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister in respect of the suggested meeting next Tuesday in relation to the flag debate presently before the house. Does the Prime Minister have in mind the suggestion that a joint committee of both houses be formed to study the matter and make recommendations to the House of Commons?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I have in mind the idea of listening to any proposals brought forward by my colleagues, the leaders of the other parties.



PUBLIC WORKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North
Centre): Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. In view of rather disturbing reports about the government's leasing of space in unfinished buildings at rentals that will pay almost the entire cost of those buildings in a short period of time, though the government is taking only part of the space, would the minister care to make a statement regarding this matter?
Hon. J. P. Deschalelels (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, I am very glad the hon. member gives me this opportunity to make a statement following the report published in yesterday's newspapers.
I can now say that, for the first time in the history of space rental by any government, public tenders have been called. In the case of the two buildings concerned, a call for tenders was made and was published in the local newspapers, following which some 20 contractors showed interest in the two contracts. Six of them made bids and we selected the two lowest.
That is the only information which, to my mind, was missing in yesterday's newspapers, but I believe it to be the most important.


Mr. Knowles:: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. If it is costing that much to

rent these buildings at the lowest tenders, would it not be better for the government to build their own?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Speaker, the price is not the only factor to take into consideration. It may be that if you look at the rent over a period of ten years, you find out that it amounts to nearly the price of the building or even a little more, but other factors have to be taken into consideration, such as repairs, etc., to arrive at an adequate price.
Furthermore, I must tell my hon. friend that for at least 25 years-and I also refer to the former government-the same situation arose and gave the same results, but there was never a call for public tenders.


Hon. Paul Mariineau (Pontiac-Temisca-mingue):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the minister a supplementary question. In undertaking to rent buildings which are not yet built, does not the minister think that he is encouraging unfair speculation?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Not if we call for public tenders, Mr. Speaker.
And at this stage, for the information of hon. members, I must say that we are at least 15 years behind schedule in our renting program for all the services needed.
The time factor is extremely important, as is also the price factor. That is why we are now calling for public tenders, and inasmuch as this rule will be adhered to rigidly in the future, I fail to see how we would be encouraging speculation.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the minister whether he would consider it exorbitant to pay over $6 million over a ten year period for all the space except the ground floor of a building that cost $4 million, and to pay $5,750,000 over a ten year period for half the space in a building that costs $6 million?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: No, Mr. Speaker, not necessarily; and I am sure if my hon. friend makes any investigations here in this area of Ottawa he will admit that the $3.25 or $3.50 per square foot is the lowest price we can get in respect of any building of this type.


Mr. A. B. Patterson (Fraser Valley):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the minister a supplementary question about this matter. In view of the rent that is being demanded in this particular situation would it not be 20220-431J
Inquiries of the Ministry advisable for the minister to follow the example of another government and advise these gentlemen to sharpen their pencils and bring in more realistic figures?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Speaker, in these two particular cases, of course, we departed from the former practice. That is the reason we asked for public tenders. I should like my hon. friend to keep this fact in mind. All contractors were invited, through public advertising, to submit tenders, and this is the result.
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, would the minister table these tenders so we may see them?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Speaker, of course I would be delighted to table all documents for the examination of my hon. friend.


John George Diefenbaker: Just table the ones in question.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerald Laniel (Beauharnois-Sala-berry):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Would the minister inform the house whether her department is considering the possibility of publishing a press release containing the facts and details surrounding the decision of the hon. member for Wentworth (Mr. Morison) to give up smoking for 30 days, and about the eventual penalty for a breach of promise?



RESEARCH


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Heward Grafftey (Brome-Missisquoi):: Mr. Speaker, notice of the following question has been given to the Minister of National Health and Welfare, and the urgency of my question arises from the discontinuance of private funds from outside Canada for assistance to medical research in Canada. Is the government about to announce a new policy for assistance to basic medical research in Canada, or will we have to wait for a further study to be made of the Hall report before such policy is announced?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, the matter is not specifically related to the Hall report, but the question of assistance
6816	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry to medical research, which is not only within the responsibility of the Department of National Health and Welfare, is, as always, under urgent consideration.



TORONTO


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Marcel Lessard (Lake St. John):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Industry, I wish to put a question to the Prime Minister. Would the Prime Minister tell the house under which authority or powers the federal government was able to justify its contribution of about $80 million for the construction of a nuclear energy plant in the suburbs of Toronto in order to supply electricity to that area?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, this is a very important and complicated question which can hardly be answered on orders of the day. When the estimates are before the house for consideration I am sure a full explanation will be given.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Reynold Rapp (Humboldt-Melforl-Tis-dale):: Mr. Speaker, I notice the Minister of Agriculture has returned from the west. Can he inform the house what results he obtained at a meeting with the farmers' union in respect of the contentious question involving the moisture content of grain? Can he also tell us whether he held a meeting to discuss the handling charges?


Hon. Harry W. Hays (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, in connection with moisture content, as the hon. member is aware as of April 1 this was reduced from 14.5 per cent to 14 per cent. The farmers' union was concerned about this reduction. When it was explained to them that we were merely bringing this moisture content in line with the moisture content in grains of competing countries, I believe they were quite satisfied. Most of the countries with which we are now competing have a lower moisture content.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Remi Paul (Berthier-Maskinonge-De-Lanaudiere):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. Does he intend to yield to the pressure exerted upon him by the government of the province of Quebec for the appointment as judges of the Quebec superior court of Mr. Rene Hamel, attorney general of the province of Quebec, and of Mr. Gerard Cournoyer, minister of transport?


Hon. Guy Favreau (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, no pressure has been exerted upon me on this matter by the government of the province of Quebec.


Rémi Paul: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Can the Minister of Justice tell us whether pressure has been exerted by the premier of the province of Quebec?



BRITISH COLUMBIA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. V. Pugh (Okanagan Boundary):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Justice. Can the minister advise me whether a county court judge has been appointed as yet for the county of Yale, B.C.?
Hon Guy Favreau (Minister of Justice):
Mr. Speaker, I have in mind for recommendation the name of the future appointee.



ALBERTA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Bow River):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. It has been alleged that Bill Dickie, M.L.A., the Liberal member for Calgary, has written the Minister of Justice asking that the Alberta treasury branches be investigated by the Senate committee on banking and commerce in view of alleged improprieties.


Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice.



LABOUR RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour regarding elections being held by the seafearers international union. I wonder whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that two of the candidates, Andre Bansept of Quebec, and Gilbert Johnson of Montreal, have met with some misfortune in that one has been fired and the other transferred. I wonder if he could make inquiries as to whether the board of trustees is looking into this matter to see whether these two incidents are in any way related to the union election, and whether this is an attempt to rig the election and reduce it to a farce.


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of Labour):: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I have noticed these reports and I will make inquiries to assure myself and the hon. member that there is nothing sinister.



CANADIAN CONSTITUTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister. I asked him yesterday whether any amendment to the Canadian constitution having to do with making it a Canadian document would be enacted in another country or here in Canada, and the Prime Minister said he would like to look into the matter and say something about it today. Is he in a position to make that statement now?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I have this morning received a memorandum on this matter from the constitutional and legal experts of the department concerned and I should like to study it before I make a statement, which I now hope to be able to make on Monday. I am sorry it is not available this morning.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Batten in the chair.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration



DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

[Stage Direction]
I. Departmental administration, $1,130,500.
Hon. Rene Tremblay (Minisier of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Chairman, I am pleased indeed that my estimates are to be studied by the committee today. I know the great interest taken by hon. members and the public at large in this important department of government, and I am pleased to be in a position to again set forth the policies of the government in this regard.
I am taking this opportunity to make certain important announcements to the house. I have a fairly long statement on the three branches comprising my department, the citizenship branch, the immigration branch and Indian affairs. In order to expedite matters I propose to deliver my statement in French, but the translators have been provided with the material so there may be simultaneous translation.


Mr. Skoreyko:: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether you would ask for order. I find it very difficult to hear the minister.


The Deputy Chairman:: The point of order is well taken. It is very difficult to hear what the minister is saying. Possibly we could have a little less noise in the chamber.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, I take it that there has been distribution of this statement to the press. Would it be possible for the minister to extend the courtesy of letting me have a copy of the statement so I can follow it?


René Tremblay: Yes.

Mr. Chairman, the Canadian Citizenship Act came into force on January 1, 1947, and for the first time provided for the legal status of "Canadian citizens". The act is administered by the Canadian citizenship registration branch, which has an establishment of 96 at headquarters in Ottawa, and 64 in the citizenship courts situated in various centres in Canada.
Courts have been established at Toronto, Montreal, Hamilton, London, Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Moncton, Windsor and Ottawa.
These courts along with the regularly constituted courts provide facilities for persons wishing to apply for Canadian citizenship. There are in addition 56 persons who have been appointed courts for the purpose of the Canadian Citizenship Act in areas in Canada remote from regularly constituted courts.
6818	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Four similar appointments have been made overseas to assist servicemen who wish to become Canadian citizens.
Persons applying for citizenship through courts must first satisfy the court that the several statutory requirements set forth in the act have been met before the application may be processed by the branch headquarters in Ottawa.
I am pleased to inform the hon. members who have expressed an interest in the qualifications which must be met by an applicant for Canadian citizenship, that a review has been made of the standard required of applicants and that certain amendments to the citizenship act are to be introduced into parliament shortly that will facilitate the acquisition of citizenship. This is in keeping with the policy of the Liberal party. At the same time, it will be recommended that provisions which now discriminate between naturalized and natural-born Canadians be removed from the act. The regulations to the Canadian Citizenship Act have been amended to include a provision to schedule B that will permit veterans of the armed forces of Canada who were on active service during time of war and who have not previously been naturalized, to be exempt from the payment of the fee of $10 required under item 8 of the same schedule. I am also endeavouring to establish uniform criteria for the use of courts in the administration of citizenship across Canada.
In 1963, 69,468 persons became Canadian citizens. This is fourth highest number for any one year; the highest was in 1957 when 95,462 certificates were granted. From January 1, 1947, to December 31, 1963, a total of 723,847 persons have been granted citizenship in Canada. In addition, approximately
460,000	certificates were issued to persons who wished to have proof of their status as Canadians.
The number of applications fluctuates from year to year, but it is known that about 40 per cent of the immigrants who entered Canada during the past ten years who were eligible for Canadian citizenship have became Canadians.
It has been found that fitting and appropriate ceremonies for the presentation of certificates of citizenship can focus a great deal of attention on the benefits to new Canadians of the acquisition of Canadian citizenship. I am therefore encouraging more participation by voluntary organizations in citizenship ceremonies. For the same reason, an item has been included in the estimates to provide for


the expansion of the jurisdiction of some of the present courts and for the opening of a new court of Canadian citizenship in Calgary, Alberta. At the same time I shall give continuing study to the opening of courts in other areas not yet serviced by a court of Canadian citizenship.
The Canadian citizenship branch could be described as the extension arm of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. It will be appreciated that much of the work of my department is concerned with the fulfilment of the hopes and aspirations of special categories of persons. A civil service, no matter what their number or dedication, cannot replace the personal interest that needs to be shown by the average citizen if the goals I seek are to be attained. In carrying out its responsibilities, the citizenship branch encourages and assists individuals, groups and agencies that are interested in immigrants, Indians and general citizenship to play a more effective role.
The data from a survey of language classes for immigrants, which I am reviewing at present, will be used in discussions with various agencies offering English or French language instruction, with a view to improving the courses offered and rendering them as attractive as possible to immigrants. I have directed the officials to intensify their efforts in order that more citizenship courses are offered in conjunction with language classes. Such courses will enable applicants for Canadian citizenship to become more familiar with Canadian institutions and traditions, in preparation for the court examination which non-British subjects must take when applying for Canadian citizenship.
Hon. members are aware of the public interest evidenced in recent years, most dynamically, in the organization of Indian friendship councils and centres in a large number of communities across Canada and in the emergence of two national organizations, the national Indian council and the Indian-Eskimo association. The citizenship branch will increase its activities in this field in co-operation with these organizations, which add security that Indians need to feel when off their reserves and which make it easier for them to live in communities that offer the type of work they would like to have.
In respect of general citizenship, the branch will be asked to play an active role in encouraging and helping Canadians to participate fully in centennial celebrations. It is our hope that 1967 will be an occasion

for all Canadians to become more aware of the historical development of our country and the cultural heritage that has accumulated during the past 100 years.
May I take this opportunity to offer some observations on the subject of immigration as it affects Canada. This is the first opportunity I have had to acquaint the committee in any extensive manner with my views on this subject which is one of paramount importance to all of us.
Because of limitations of time I shall not deal at length with the contribution which the new Canadians have made to the general Canadian welfare. It is a study well worthwhile in itself. I could not make this statement, however, without saying that the Canadian economy and our culture simply could not have advanced either quantitatively or qualitatively to their present state without the very substantial contribution of these thousands of immigrants. We owe thanks to those who have come to us in the period under discussion.
We come now to the question of where we stand at this moment in the matter of Canada's domestic concern with immigration and the need for policy in this field to meet the needs of 1964 and the years beyond.
Mr. Chairman, before proceeding with this question I should like to explain what I mean by the term "skilled" which I shall be using in this statement from time to time. In my view this is a fairly broad term which includes a variety of persons. It includes those with a reasonably good level of education sufficient to permit a range of mobility and adaptability required in most occupations today. These persons should also have qualifications in their particular fields. In terms of the trades which are common in Canada, these qualifications would normally mean the possession of journeymen's papers or certificates of competency. The term "skilled" also includes those with more advanced technical or professional training, as well as those with successful experience as managers or proprietors of commercial, industrial and agricultural activities.
While in years past there was a need for the immigration of unskilled and semi-skilled workers in large numbers, this is no longer the case. The Canada of 1964 is not the Canada of 1913, 1946 or even 1954. Machines now aid manpower in many areas of activity. In some fields, such as agriculture, fewer workers actually produce far more than ever before. Technological advancements are caus-
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration ing sweeping alterations in the pattern of employment.
This committee does not need to be told that the greatest handicap of the majority of our unfortunate unemployed is a lack of education or skill. Our government has committed and spent substantial funds for the training and re-training of those who lack the necessary skills for today's employment market. This year's budget, in providing for family allowances for children in school beyond 16 years of age, emphasized certain aspects of our concern today about those who leave formal training inadequately prepared.
At the same time, there is a very substantial demand and need for skilled individuals in many undertakings across Canada. The presence of such workers provides a stimulus to the enterprise and the economy of this country. Unfortunately, these persons are not always available from within Canada or, if here, are not sufficiently mobile to fill particular opportunities. Then too, in this country-as in any country-there is abundant scope for managerial talent, as well as for those with the experience, ability and funds to establish their own enterprises.
The competition we must meet in today's world is a competition of brains, skill, ability and initiative. Despite our best efforts and whatever our virtues at this moment, we cannot claim a surplus of any of these features. We must overlook no opportunity to encourage additional people who can assist us, to come to this country.
To this end, and as a first principle of this government's immigration policy, we shall endeavour-through adequate promotion and recruitment-to bring to Canada the well-skilled on a substantial scale. This is to be a positive program. It will help to fill the gaps in our industry, commerce, and other areas of economic activity here. Increased activity across the board will aid in absorbing the unskilled amongst us.
At the same time, the infusion of skilled people will assist in developing further the better balanced and even more dynamic economic structure we will need to absorb the greatly increased entries to the labour force from Canadian sources which will soon take place, due to our own rapidly expanding population, a feature that will be even more important in the next six to eight years.
It is impossible to make any valid predictions of the exact numbers of immigrants during a period ahead of, say, a year. This
6820	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration is increasingly the case in present circumstances. On the one hand, our economic capacity to absorb skilled, educated and otherwise well-qualified immigrants is virtually unlimited. On the other hand, this type of person is in demand in many countries these days. We must obtain these immigrants in competition with other countries and there is no great surplus of qualified people anywhere in the world.
To help establish a more positive immigration program our government has taken the following steps:
(a)	We have provided for an interdepartmental committee composed of senior officials well versed in economic, labour and social problems to assess our needs, and our absorptive capacity, for migrants in Canada's economy. This committee, which will serve in an advisory capacity, should help the government in its objective of developing fairly long term programs not subject to the turning on and off of the immigration tap which has had such objectionable results in the past.
(b)	We are embarking on a considerably increased promotional campaign abroad, particularly in Europe where the greatest number of likely immigration applicants are to be found. Additional funds for this purpose are contained in the estimates before you.
(c)	The government recently approved a new establishment structure for immigration personnel abroad. This is a first step in our plans to ensure better classifications for our personnel in order to implement a really productive and positive immigration program.
(d)	The existing organization, served as it is by many hard working and capable people, is not such as to get the maximum results from our immigration efforts. The organization must be made fully responsive to today's immigration requirements. It is very short of staff, particularly in its overseas service. If the effort to secure adequate numbers of immigrants with the skills Canada needs is to succeed, we require more and better trained personnel and we must see that they are employed to maximum advantage in posts for which they are best qualified. We must hold open the opportunity to pursue a career for these employees, a career satisfying to the person concerned and as fully rewarding as any comparable posts in the public service. A complete re-organization in immigration, both at home and abroad, is overdue. It is now in the course of development.
(e)	Not only are changes in organization required with appropriate staffing, but so also are changes badly needed in the picture


Canada presents overseas in so far as its immigration offices and facilities are concerned. These have been too often dull and unattractive. Every effort will be made, consistent with good and efficient management, to secure office locations and quarters that will do Canada justice, enable our staff to work effectively, and promote a favourable reaction among potential immigrants. Such steps will enable us to compete on more equal grounds with other countries which are also making strong efforts to secure the immigrants they need. Let me say that in our efforts to promote immigration abroad, this government will welcome the participation of the provincial governments wherever they feel they can be of help. In addition, it is the intention of the government to discuss immigration matters with certain foreign governments in the hope we can achieve a better understanding of our operations and ambitions in the immigration field.
We come now to the second principle of this government's immigration policy. It has to do with the social-and in some respects-the humanitarian aspects of immigration. I refer to our intention to do what we can to assist in the reunion of families-with particular regard to the immediate family, that is, the head of the family and his dependents-and to assist refugees.
In the past the department has received criticism from some quarters where sponsored immigration is concerned, on two main points. First, the length of waiting period in some countries has been unduly long before relatives can be examined for immigration purposes. Second, there has appeared to be inconsistency on the part of immigration offices within Canada, in assessing the adequacy or otherwise of the reception arrangement which can be provided by the sponsor here.
With regard to the first point, the waiting period for examination in Hong Kong for example has been reduced from nine months to three. We hope to effect even further improvement in this respect not only with regard to that area, but in connection with the selection of immigrants everywhere. This, of course, is not the end but the beginning.
I am very conscious of the desirability and even the necessity of re-establishing families, of bringing together again a man, his wife and their dependent children, without avoidable delay. All the procedures and practices within the department are under my systematic and critical review. The procedures governing our operations in this particular area are being dealt with on a priority basis.

Furthermore, the moves being made for more qualified staff and better facilities which I have already mentioned, are under way with this problem very much in mind. Within a reasonable period I hope to be able to report to this committee that waiting periods for examination of immigrants have been reduced to an absolute minimum.
I should like at this time to say a few words on my visit earlier this year to Hong Kong. Several important conclusions and decisions have resulted from that trip which will be of interest to hon. members. I also visited Japan where I had the pleasure of very informative and fruitful discussions with officials of the Japanese government.
This was the first of a number of inspection visits which I hope to make, as minister, to learn first hand the facts on which to base a development of new immigration policies and programs. Early in September I expect to leave for an inspection trip of immigration offices in Europe and while there, I plan to consult with government officials in the various countries. I chose Hong Kong for my first visit because I was deeply concerned about the complex problems involved in Chinese immigration and complaints I had received that our Hong Kong operation was inefficient and discriminatory.
I found Hong Kong prosperous and thriving. It is a model of efficient administration for which the British authorities deserve great praise. The flow of illegal immigrants from mainland China has declined to a trickle, and the population situation is now more stable. You will note that I do not use the term "refugees" in relation to those persons leaving mainland China. The British maintain, and I agree, that these people are not political refugees at all, but are simply seeking a better economic life. This is proven by the fact that once they are accepted as Hong Kong residents they flock back to China to visit by the hundreds of thousands, apparently without fear of persecution.
I also learned in Hong Kong that the British authorities do not regard mass emigration as a solution to their population problems. They feel that if it becomes known that Hong Kong is an easy stepping stone to Canada or the United States the colony would receive hundreds more migrants from the mainland for every immigrant who goes to North America.
Therefore, while Canada can offer a better future to some individuals from Hong Kong,
any large scale program of resettlement here

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration would do more harm than good as far as Hong Kong is concerned. Therefore, my first conclusion was that we must look at immigration from Hong Kong in ordinary immigration terms rather than as a special refugee problem.
Even though Chinese from Hong Kong are not to be given any special refugee status, I must emphasize that the ordinary immigrant admissible classes, as they affect Chinese, are broad: they permit the admission of the immediate families, parents, grandparents and fiancees of Canadian residents, as well as unsponsored immigrants who have sufficient education or skills to become established in Canada.
In addition there is another less well-known admissible class, of which even many of the Chinese seem unaware. This permits Canadian citizens to sponsor the admission of such non-dependent relatives as adults or married sons or daughters, along with the spouse and children of such sons and daughters. These non-dependents are sponsorable in the usual way subject to appropriate educational and occupational standards.
It can be seen, therefore, that the legal admissible classes do not create any impossible barrier to the reunion of Chinese families in Canada. However, the law does require that each immigrant, whether of Chinese origin or not, be examined to find out if he qualifies for admission, to ensure that he is not a criminal or subversive and, in the case of sponsored persons, to ensure that they have the relationship claimed to the sponsor in Canada.
The greatest problem we face in examining immigrants from mainland China is the difficulty in verifying their identities. Such immigrants arrive in Hong Kong with virtually no identifying documents. There are no official records available which can be used to verify the statements of the individual. This situation has given rise to extensive abuse in Chinese immigration with which present and past Canadian governments have attempted to cope.
There is evidence that many Chinese immigrants to Canada are in this country illegally. During my stay in Hong Kong I personally discussed the problem of illegal immigration with the immigration officials of other countries. All these countries experience the same problems that Canada does. They agree that there exists a well-organized and highly efficient illegal Chinese immigration system involving forged documents and photographs,
6822	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration schools that coach immigrants in false identities, persistent use of false statutory declarations, and other abuses.
Some Canadians are relatively unconcerned about illegal Chinese immigration. They feel that past discrimination has forced Chinese to use illegal means to get their dependents to Canada.
Our investigations have satisfied us that frequently relatives and friends, no doubt largely influenced by ties of blood and sympathy, have been parties to such illegal entries.
Often these admissions were arranged by syndicates or individuals who make a business of smuggling inadmissible persons into Canada from Hong Kong.
I am also satisfied that, contrary to popular belief, a large number of these illegal Chinese immigrants are not close relatives of Canadian residents. They were brought here solely for the profit of illegal immigration agents. This is a serious and disturbing situation. Not only does it tarnish the reputation of Chinese Canadians as good citizens, but it has added greatly to their problems when they seek to bring out their true relatives.
Speaking personally and for my department, I wish to emphasize that we have no desire to penalize Chinese Canadians seeking to bring their legitimate families to Canada.
During my visit to Hong Kong, and in subsequent discussions with departmental officials, every effort has been made to find ways to facilitate the admission of legal immigrants without destroying or weakening essential controls.
I found in Hong Kong that there are many changes which can be made in our system there that will facilitate the admission of close relatives to Canada. We have already reduced the waiting period for immigrants in Hong Kong from nine months to less than three, and I hope it can be reduced still further. The quickest way of improving the situation would be to provide more immigration staff in Hong Kong but for the time being extra staff cannot be accommodated in our Hong Kong office. We have already enlarged our staff as much as our office space will permit, and we are seeking larger office quarters. There is a severe shortage of office space in Hong Kong but we are trying to reserve space in a building now being erected. With larger and better quarters in Hong Kong and with certain other changes we should be able to deal with Chinese immigrants on a current basis without abnormal delays.


It is worthy of note, however, that, notwithstanding the shortage of staff and shortage of office space in Hong Kong, last year immigration of Chinese to Canada increased substantially. In 1963, some 1,571 Chinese were admitted as compared with a total of 876 in 1962. In the first five months of this year 879 were admitted as against 481 during the same period in 1963. In other words, the number of Chinese immigrants in 1963 increased almost 100 per cent over the figure for 1962 and has again increased 84 per cent in the first five months of this year as compared with the same period in 1963.
It is obvious, therefore, that as a direct result of the policies of this government and the changes in procedures which have been effected since this government took office hundreds of Chinese families have emigrated to Canada and hundreds more have been re-united in this country.
A serious problem for immigrants in Hong Kong is the necessity to visit various offices for medical tests and examinations. This is tedious, causes long waits and is expensive for the migrants.
I am discussing with my colleague, the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Miss LaMarsh), the establishment of a completely integrated "one-stop" medical centre in our immigration office in Hong Kong. This would greatly benefit the immigrants.
There are in Hong Kong many well-qualified persons who have no relatives in Canada but who would make good immigrants. In the past, the department has been so preoccupied with servicing sponsored immigrants that little time was available for the unsponsored. This has been partially remedied and when we are in new quarters in Hong Kong, it should be possible to devote more of our resources to unsponsored immigrants without in any way interfering with the processing of the sponsored. Since sponsored immigrants are not usually skilled, it is desirable that this humanitarian flow be balanced by a movement of well-qualified unsponsored persons.
There are other changes which are being made in our office systems and routines, and our staffing and staff training policies, which should further improve our performance. These are matters of internal administration but I expect the results will soon speak for themselves.


The Chairman:: Order. I regret to interrupt the minister but I must advise the house that his time is over.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Carry on.


Some hon. Members:: Continue.


Lucien Lamoureux: Is it agreed that the minister may proceed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
(Translation)


René Tremblay: Mr. Chairman, I am happy to say that my visit to Hong Kong satisfied me that our Canadian visa and medical officers, and our local Chinese staff are honest, extremely hard working public servants who have been doing a good job in the face of very difficult circumstances. I certainly do not want my comments on the needed improvements in the system to be considered as a reflection on their integrity or their devotion to duty. I have the greatest respect and regard for them all.
The foregoing has dealt with our administrative problems in connection with Chinese immigration. As a result of my trip I have also reached several general conclusions about the legal admissible classes and immigration policy as they apply to Chinese and I wish to speak of them at this time.
First, the admissible classes.
On the whole, the present admissible classes are adequate to permit a healthy Chinese immigration movement and the reunion of families. However, I am pleased to advise the house that the approval of the governor in council has just been given to one important addition to the admissible classes, and that is to make male fiances admissible on the same legal basis as female fiancees. This amendment will benefit particularly the Canadian Chinese community but will have the happy corollary of satisfying the justifiable ambitions of other ethnic groups.
I am not recommending at present that sponsorship privileges for Chinese be extended to cover brothers, sisters and more distant relatives. I regret this but unfortunately there are serious practical difficulties involved. An expansion of the admissible classes to cover these non-dependents would seriously interfere with the good service we propose to give to the immediate dependents. In addition it would multiply the problem of control and detection of impostors to an extent far beyond our present experience and would render ineffective our efforts to exercise essential controls. This decision is dictated solely by the facts of the situation and not by any desire to discriminate against Chinese.
Second, the Chinese status adjustment program.
20220-432J
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
The Chinese have complained that this program is discriminatory. Actually the status adjustment system was intended to benefit the Chinese but its purpose has been misunderstood. Moreover, it has had limited success in spite of the fact that it has been in operation for four years, far longer than was anticipated. While we would not wish to discourage Chinese from voluntarily coming to our offices to set their personal immigration records straight we shall no longer exercise forbearance in respect of immigration violations merely because such voluntary statements are made. Everyone has had ample time to put his affairs in order and henceforth from September 1, 1964, R.C.M.P. and immigration officers are being instructed to apply the law to Chinese in exactly the same way as to other residents of Canada.
In concluding my remarks on Chinese immigration, I wish to say that, as Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, it is my aim to develop a positive immigration program to bring more well-qualified immigrants to this country and assist residents of Canada to reunite their dependent families here. Chinese immigration increased substantially last year and I firmly expect this increase to continue without loss of control over illegal immigration.
It is the sincere wish of this government, as I am sure it is of all Canadians of good will, to treat our Chinese compatriots as fairly as possible and make available to them the same facilities and opportunities provided to other citizens for the reunion of their families in this country and the prosperity of their community. If this desirable objective is to be attained it is essential that we have the wholehearted co-operation of the Chinese community, the vast majority of whose members are honest and reputable Canadians, in eliminating the abuses which have been of concern to all law-abiding citizens.
I should also say a word or two about my brief visit in Japan, during which I met the Japanese foreign minister and had informal talks with Japanese economic and emigration officials.
Emigration from Japan to Canada has been negligible in recent years, averaging less than 200 annually. Even with the change in immigration regulations in 1962, opening up immigration from all parts of the world, there was little interest shown by the Japanese, as indicated by the few applications received from that country.
There are several explanations for this. First, Japan's economy is booming and there
6824	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration are actually labour shortages in many skilled occupations. Japanese workers have ample opportunities at home. Moreover, Japan's emigration has, in the past, been organized in group settlements and the Japanese are accustomed to applying for migration in schemes organized by their own government rather than for individual migration. On the other hand, Canada's society is today so complex and highly developed that it is not possible for us to introduce large group settlements of one ethnic origin, and our entire immigration system is based on individual and family selection and settlement in Canada.
In our discussions we did much to clarify our respective viewpoints. Also, I endeavoured to convince the Japanese that any of their people who do qualify and are admitted to Canada will be assisted by our immigration service to locate jobs and homes and, in general, will be aided as fully as they would be in one of their own government-organized group settlements.
In view of the present economic conditions in Japan, it is not realistic to expect that any large scale immigration movement will result. But I am confident that steps have been taken which will result in a growing movement to Canada of qualified Japanese professional and technical workers and their families.
I should refer to another point in immigration procedures concerning apparent inconsistencies in assessing the abilities of sponsors to receive and care for their relatives until the latter have become established in Canada. Let me say first of all that this has rarely been a problem in recent years where the spouse and dependent children of a sponsor in Canada have been involved. The department takes a lenient view in such cases and the financial and domestic arrangements required have been reasonably easy to meet.
The sponsoring of relatives other than dependents is, however, a different matter, as I think all members will agree. The responsibilities assumed by the sponsor in Canada are serious ones. They include the willingness and ability to provide care and maintenance as need be until the immigrant and his family establish themselves in Canada. It was in assessing the abilities of various sponsors to meet these responsibilities that there may have been some variance of opinion on the part of different immigration officers.
To overcome this problem my officers, after intensive study, have developed more objective standards of assessing settlement ar-


rangements. These standards, which are essentially financial, were put into effect last February, upon my arrival in the department. Reports to date indicate that they are working out well, and in large measure have resolved the problem. Applicants who are unable to satisfy the criteria-which I believe to be reasonable-are informed of those deficiencies that must be overcome to have their applications approved. As I say, this system appears to be operating well; however, I shall keep it under review to ensure that it serves the purpose intended.
In the field of refugees, also, we intend to pursue those policies which have enabled Canada to show its concern with the unfortunate of the world's political upheavals. This concern has been demonstrated throughout the post-war years, notably in the displaced persons movement, in connection with the Hungarian uprising, the world refugee year and in other arrangements which have been made for individual refugees with particularly difficult handicaps.
The high commissioner for refugees, as an appointee of the United Nations, deserves our support within the terms of his present mandate. It is the intention of my department- where migration is an appropriate solution- to offer him all possible help within our capabilities. This in itself is not something new but is a reaffirmation of our government's position in the field of refugee problems.
I come now to certain matters of general interest in the immigration field. First, there is the question of legislation. As I mentioned in connection with my visit to the Far East, I am recommending to the governor in council that section 31(c) of the immigration regulations be amended to provide for the addition of male fiances to those categories admissible on the sponsorship of a resident or citizen of Canada. This is all I propose for the moment in this direction. However, it is my firm intention to visit personally, all major areas of immigration operations and from the first hand knowledge which I shall gain, there may well come other recommendations for changes in the legislation.
At the same time, I am conscious of the representations made by members of parliament and others to the effect that there are provisions open to question in certain sections of the present Immigration Act. Some members have introduced private bills with the intention of revising specific sections of the act.
Let me say that I am in sympathy with many of the points raised. However, I think

most members will agree that there are many inter-relationships between various sections of the act, and isolated amendments while perhaps appropriate in respect of one or more particular problems, could have unfortunate effects in other areas.
All the points raised from outside the department as well as from within are being carefully noted and I shall shortly assign priorities for detailed studies of the changes suggested and required. Following this I would expect to introduce a revised act for the consideration of parliament as soon as possible.
Another question of importance in the general policy area is the problem of quality control in the immigration movement. From what I have said earlier I think it should be clear that this government intends to do everything possible to secure, through immigration, a substantial flow of desirable skilled people and their families and to expedite the reunion of families. In this process we intend to improve our administrative facilities and processes to the point where there can be no legitimate excuse for "queue jumping".
While we shall be fair it will be necessary, none the less, to be firm. Persons who seek to circumvent the law by entering Canada illegally, for example, ship deserters, can expect the full process of the law fairly and justly to be applied to them.
At the same time-and with even more emphasis if possible-I should like to stress the government's concern with these elements who seek to infiltrate the Canadian community to carry on criminal activities, especially of the organized variety. Let me assure the committee that persons of the kind under discussion will be denied admission, if known. Those who may have gained admission and are within the jurisdiction of immigration legislation will be subject to the provisions respecting deportation. Obviously all necessary control measures can be effective only with wholehearted public support. I hereby ask for such support from the Canadian people through you, their responsible representatives.
Finally, I am happy to inform the committee that just last night treasury board gave me authority to proceed at once with our plans for reorganization in immigration.
At this time the changes will involve immigration headquarters at Ottawa and our offices overseas. Proposals regarding our offices in Canada will follow in due course. The changes to be made in the organization at the present time will more effectively meet
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the government's policy to implement a more positive and productive immigration program. We shall then have a considerably greater capacity to seek out suitable immigrants, to provide all necessary information about Canada and its opportunities and to speed up the procedures by which immigrants coming either on their own or to join with relatives already in Canada will be dealt with.
Important portions of the work now centralized at Ottawa from our immigration offices in numerous countries will be decentralized in such a way as to eliminate much of the present transfer of paper and the consequent delays. It is important that not only better but that quicker services be given to all those persons who plan to come to this country as immigrants.
The changes in organization should improve the morale of our immigration employees markedly. This is a point the importance of which I have already stressed.
The new organization will reflect fully the functional aspects of the flow of immigration, beginning with its planning, proceeding to the recruitment and selection of immigrants in accord with such planning, and going on to the successful establishment of these immigrants in Canada. There will be five principal divisions at the headquarters in Ottawa: (1) policy and planning; (2) overseas services; (3) Canadian services; (4) special services; and (5) support services. Special services will have to do with those exceptional persons who give unusual difficulty, such as those who must be deported for one reason or another. Support services will have to do with all administrative requirements in respect to finances, personnel, provision of suitable quarters, both in Canada and overseas, furnishings and equipment, and all the numerous basic needs of any large body of employees.
The changes in the plans for the overseas services envisage the setting up of a new regional office in continental Europe, charged with the general supervision of the immigration programs in the 16 countries where we maintain offices. This is comparable in some degree to the regional office we already have in London which covers the United Kingdom and Ireland, but its territory is of course far more extensive and the problems it will meet will be more complex due to the numerous governments with which it will deal and the many languages with which it must have requisite familiarity. The provision of such a regional office at this time
6326	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration will greatly reinforce the efforts of our present offices in the various countries of continental Europe. We will give them much greater support in their promotion and information programs and will be able to react much more quickly and effectively to their requirements than has ever been possible from Ottawa. This is a measure of decentralization that should be most effective. The result should be to stimulate and to expedite Canadian immigration efforts in all the countries now concerned, and in additional countries if such expansion becomes advisable.
In dealing with the reorganization of the overseas immigration services I should point out that these changes are by no means confined to Europe. Another aspect of the new plan will be to so organize as to give added support and attention to the matter of immigrants from sources in the western hemisphere as well as from sources in Asia and in the Pacific areas. For the first time there will be a unit of our immigration staff whose primary responsibility it will be to look after immigration from these important sources.
May I thank the committee for its patience in bearing with me through this fairly lengthy review of a number of important aspects of immigration. I trust it will be helpful to all of us.
Mr. Chairman, I have not said a word about the Indian affairs branch of the department. With the unanimous consent of the committee and since there is a great difference between the problems of immigration and those of Indian affairs, perhaps I could make later on some comments on item 15 concerning the Indians.


William Skoreyko: Mr. Chairman, I listened with a great deal of interest to the minister's long statement. I must say that during all the years I have been in the House of Commons I have listened to former ministers of citizenship and immigration make statements, but have not heard one that was as disappointing as this one. I do not say that to be deliberately critical but because of statements that have been made outside this house on many occasions by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, particularly in regard to amendments that are indeed necessary to the Canadian Citizenship Act and the Immigration Act.
I thought today the minister would announce at least some of the important changes he has been talking about for so long. He did make one announcement to the effect that in


so far as immigrants from Hong Kong are concerned, male fiances would be able to get into Canada. I must say that is only a crumb when compared to the many promises he has made since he became minister of this department.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to deal with some of the promises that have been made over a period of time as far back as the last election. A promise was made to the Chinese people in my area of Alberta that if they voted Liberal they would not be discriminated against. Promises were made by the former minister of citizenship and immigration that amendments would be brought before the house within a short period of time in respect of the Canadian Citizenship Act and the Immigration Act.
The last time I dealt with this subject was in December of 1963, at which time I referred to several of these promises. At that time the former minister said certain changes were being contemplated. These changes are being contemplated again today.
I should like to quote from the September 24 edition of the Montreal Gazette, as follows:
Sweeping changes to regulations governing the admission to Canada of Chinese immigrants were forecast Monday night by immigration minister Favreau.
Who was the minister trying to impress when he said certain changes were to be made to allow Chinese immigrants into Canada? Perhaps he impressed some of the Chinese people in Canada who were not aware that the important changes had been made by the Conservative minister of citizenship and immigration, Mrs. Ellen Fair-clough. I believe those changes were important; they were announced in this House of Commons on January 19, 1962, and I have a list of them here.
For the sake of informing those people who may not recall that it was Hon. Ellen Fair-clough who made these sweeping changes, I should like to put on the record one paragraph of the statement she made in 1962:
Subsection (c) of section 31 provides for the admission of a somewhat wider list of immediate dependants and close relatives. It applies not only to sponsors who are Canadian citizens but also to persons other than Canadian citizens who have been legally admitted to Canada for permanent residence and who wish to bring forward a mother, father, wife, grandparent, female fiancee or an unmarried minor child.
I am sure the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration recalls that the old regulations were indeed discriminatory as, indeed, the present act is with respect to certain countries

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
in Europe. I recall reading a newspaper report of a speech made by a responsible minister of the crown to a group of Chinese, in this instance Vancouver Chinese with whom he was having a nice Chinese dinner, and at that time he referred to sweeping changes in the regulations governing the admission to Canada of Chinese immigrants. Almost the same speech, word for word, was made a year later by the new minister on the occasion of his having a nice Chinese dinner in Toronto. With the newspaper report there is a picture of the new minister. He was not quite as broad in his promises, because the newspaper report in the Globe and Mail of June 25, 1964, contains this statement:
He hinted also at a coming general overhaul of immigration policy and announced that he will go on a tour of Canadian immigration offices in other countries, including Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal and Greece. "I shall go on the Journey at the recess of parliament, if we have a recess," he told a reporter.
I was indeed happy to hear that the minister intended to visit these countries to find if there were any inadequacies in these offices that should be corrected immediately. I was glad indeed to hear this, but at the same time I am a little disappointed in that I have some 12 files before me of cases that have not been settled. I do not intend to deal with them all individually, but these 12 files have been on my desk now for a number of years. I an not being critical of the minister because these files have not been processed, but I am being critical of him because, in view of what the present regulations say, he is aware that there are people in Europe of other origins than those countries from which we readily accept immigrants and where we have office facilities, who are faced with problems. I refer to people of Ukrainian, Polish and Russian origin now living in Canada who have relatives in those countries where there are absolutely no facilities by which they can bring them to Canada.
I would make one suggestion in this regard. I suggest to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration that talks should be held with such countries as Russia, where we do not have facilities at present, to see if it is not possible to do something. I am sure the Russians would not give us permission to set up an immigration office in their country, but surely they would bend sufficiently to allow the immigration branch to have an agent in Russia who could operate out of our embassy in Moscow and whose prime function would be to encourage those people in Russia who have relatives here with whom
they would like to be reunited, and give them the necessary assistance so they could be reunited.
As an example I have one case before me which is indeed a sad one. It involves a father and mother who came to Canada from Poland, but because of the existing regulations which prohibit the admission to Canada of a son or daughter over 25 years of age they had to leave their son and one daughter, I believe, in Poland. They did so on the understanding, though it was a misunderstanding on their part, that once they were established in Canada and could provide adequate accommodation for their son and daughter and their families these people would be able to come forward immediately. This man got settled in Canada and found a good job. He was a trained craftsman, a carpenter, I believe. One day he called me and said that this was what he had been told while he was in Poland, and he now wanted to make application for his son and daughter and their families.
I do not need to remind the minister that I could not offer him much encouragement. Since then I have been trying to bring this matter to a conclusion but to no avail. Something should be done, and I hope the minister will give the matter very serious consideration.
Certainly consultation with a country like Russia in order to see what they have to say could do no harm. I know there is a means by which some of these applications can be processed. We can approach the Russian embassy or the Polish embassy here in Ottawa, but this is the long way of going about the processing of such applications.
The minister also made some comment about refugees. I did not have the text of his speech before me and could not follow his remarks as closely as I might have wished. However, I want to point out that under the administration of the Leader of the Opposition 106 refugee families were admitted to Canada from Hong Kong. I believe five families settled in the Edmonton area, some four or five in Calgary and one or two in Red Deer. The others were distributed across Canada. I have before me a newspaper article which the minister may find very interesting. I certainly do. It is a report from the Ottawa bureau of the Globe and Mail and reads as follows:
All but one of the 106 government sponsored Hong Kong refugee families brought to Canada in 1962 are self supporting. A spokesman for the Department of Citizenship and Immigration said heads
6828	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
of 105 of the families were employed by January 1. The one unemployed man, the official said, was not able to work because of sickness.
I think the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration will agree with me that this was probably one of the sounder moves made by the department. I do not want to go into the history of similar matters now, but certainly these people have proved to be very stable indeed. I do not believe you can expect to get a better performance record from a group of refugees. One hundred and five out of the 106 families are self supporting. One man, because of sickness, is not able to support his family. If I know the Chinese community, and I think I do, I do not believe these Chinese families will ever become a burden on the government. The article goes on to say:
In addition, a number of the family heads have learned English well enough to obtain employment in the field in which they were trained in China.
All the men chosen for the move to Canada were skilled workers and many were professional men.
John Diefenbaker, when he was prime minister in 1962, decided to lift the quota on Hong Kong immigrants to allow into Canada about 100 refugee families who had fled China.
The move came in the middle of a Department of Justice investigation into illegal entry by Chinese into Canada.
May I ask the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration if he will now consider, on the basis of the performance of these families, doubling that figure the next time. Let us bring in 250 families. Let us see how that works. On many occasions the minister has talked about bringing in hundreds of thousands of immigrants. Is it not then reasonable to request the minister to bring in 200 or 250 refugee families? If that program works out, then in subsequent years let us bring in 500. You could never do better, Mr. Chairman, than to bring in families that have shown a performance record like this. If the minister has some views in respect of this matter, when he replies to some of the questions posed I would be glad indeed to hear from him.
I should like to deal now with another matter that comes under the Immigration Act and which has been the cause of considerable concern. I shall bring to the attention of the minister one case upon which I am working at the moment and which is similar to the cases which are causing concern. I have before me a letter from the former minister of citizenship and immigration which was sent in response to a request I made on behalf of a constituent who wished to bring a niece to Canada for adoption because the family in the old country was poor and unable to main-


tain the family adequately. The family in Alberta interested in this adoption were wealthy indeed and did not have children of their own. It was very discouraging, not only to myself but to these people, to receive a letter of refusal. I believe this situation is one which can be altered very quickly. The letter reads in part as follows:
Additionally, there is no provision in the immigration regulations for the admission to Canada of adopted children or children for adoption.
Certainly, Mr. Chairman, this is not an unreasonable request, and changes of this nature should be made and made quickly.
I want to bring to the minister's attention one case in the province of Alberta. I believe I dealt with this particular case on one previous occasion. An elderly gentleman and his wife, who owned quite a large estate, were never able to have a family of their own, and with my assistance applied to the immigration department for permission to bring in a niece for adoption. Of course the application was refused on the ground that there was no provision for this sort of thing in the Immigration Act. The estate owner died. Shortly after that his wife also passed away. I should like the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to tell me, if he can, what happened to that $250,000 estate? It is true that it was administered by the crown, but is it not true also that a sizeable portion of that estate went to Russia?
I have a dual purpose in recommending this change to the minister. First of all, if a change such as this were made a similar incident would never again occur whereby the sum of $250,000 was sent out of Canada, because I believe it was turned over to the other members of the family in Russia. If that young lady had been admitted to Canada she would have been totally independent. She probably would have inherited the entire estate and a profitable business would have remained in the family.
There is another matter in connection with the citizenship act with which I should like to deal for a moment. The minister may recall, if he has read some of the briefs that have been sent to him-or his departmental officials can advise him to this effect if he has not-that the Canadian Ukrainian committee in Winnipeg asked the government to consider the repeal of section 18 of the citizenship act. In my view this section still discriminates against those people who are Canadian citizens but not Canadian by birth. This section deals with the loss of Canadian citizenship as

a result of residence outside of Canada. Certainly if this act is going to correspond with the true meaning of the bill of rights, this discriminatory section should be repealed.
The minister might consider another aspect of the Immigration Act which needs consideration. I should like the minister to inform me how security risks are assessed when our officials examine prospective immigrants. How do we do this? I shall give another example. For a number of years I have attempted to bring into Canada a family whose father at one time attended some communist meetings in Italy. The rest of the family have never been associated with the communist party. They swear they have no leanings in that direction, but our officials simply say that because the father attended meetings of the party in 1928-29 they are not the admissible class.
Do we have the Italian, French and German police determining the security risk involved in admitting certain immigrants? At this moment I am not prepared to offer any suggestions about a solution, but I think the minister might consider, in the case of an individual applicant, a letter of recommendation from the local priest, the local judge, or local police officer who has known the applicant for a number of years.
Dealing with the question on a local level, does the minister intend to reduce the qualification requirement for immigrants being questioned at the certificate presentation ceremonies in the respective courts to which he made reference? People who are very young, particularly those who are still in their school years, do not have much difficulty acquiring sufficient knowledge of the English language to qualify for such an examination, but I know of one case, that of a Chinese woman in the city of Edmonton well into her sixties, who probably never attended school a single day in her life. Because she was unable to name certain objects that were pointed out to her, her citizenship papers have been delayed. Is the local judge instructed to give such people special consideration, particularly on account of their age? A judge can find out from an applicant's relatives and friends how much educational background the applicant has. Certainly in this case an applicant who could not even write in Chinese would find it difficult within a short period of five years to name in English all objects that were pointed out to her.
Who operates the language courses to which the minister referred, and in what areas are they located? I think he suggested
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration there was a citizenship course in Edmonton. Is there also one in Calgary?


René Tremblay: There will be one there.


William Skoreyko: I thank the minister. I notice my time is running out, and in conclusion I would draw to the minister's attention a speech which he himself made in this house on February 27, 1964. From what I know of the minister's attitude toward people of different national origins I think he is completely impartial and unbiased so far as ethnic groups are concerned, but I fail to understand why he spoke like he did on that occasion, as recorded at page 316 of Hansard for that date:
There is a tradition of long standing in this parliament, that the Speaker's function in the House of Commons and in the other place is entrusted In turn to representatives of the two most important ethnic groups in this country.
According to another tradition, the mover and seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne are chosen among the representatives of the two most important racial groups in Canada.
I wonder what the minister meant by that. If he meant what I think he meant, then of course the statement he made in this house today has very little meaning. I think it must have been a slip of the tongue, or probably an error in translation. I hope the minister did not mean to imply that any one group of people in Canada was more important than others. Mr. Chairman, I hope to rise later this afternoon as various items come up for discussion, and at the moment I thank the minister for his statement.


Mr. Brewin:: Mr. Chairman, I am very glad to have heard the minister's statement. This subject of an enlightened and sensible immigration policy is very important for a number of reasons, one being, as he indicated, that the economic welfare of Canada depends to a considerable extent on our having an enlightened immigration policy. Second, our relations with other peoples of the world depend on having an enlightened immigration policy. There are very many possibilities in the small world of today of resentment and misunderstanding arising if our immigration policies are, or appear to be, discriminatory and unfair. Finally, immigration is a matter of very great importance because of the immense number of individual human family problems, as the minister well knows, that are involved in the administration of immigration regulations. Therefore I am glad he has made this lengthy statement about the policies of his department.
6830	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
There were many good things in the minister's statement, but I cannot help expressing my agreement with the hon. member for Edmonton East who said the statement, by and large, was a disappointing one. To me it was something like the old cliche of the curate's egg, good in parts and bad in parts. The total impression was not very satisfactory. The reason I say this to the minister is that despite some of the good points I will mention, and for which he and his department deserve credit, there remains a failure to tackle some of the basic problems, and we will not have a satisfactory immigration policy until they are tackled.
I will deal with that in greater detail later. The announcement as to the proposed changes in the regulations did not deal with the charges which have been made, and properly made, of discrimination written right into the regulations themselves. There is failure to appreciate that right at the root of the procedures laid down at the present time is a system which, as the hon. member for Edmonton East said, perpetuates a disregard for the basic principles of the bill of rights. This has not been dealt with, unfortunately, in the minister's statement.
But may I, first of all, call attention to things in this statement which we welcome. 1 warmly welcome the minister's announcement that steps are to be taken to bring about a positive approach to the subject of immigration. As long as we, or officials in the department, or some of them, think in terms of keeping people out; as long as that is the basic philosophy, no satisfactory result can ever be achieved. I was glad to hear the minister speak of a positive program, and I was glad to hear of the various steps he proposes to take in this direction; the setting up of an interdepartmental committee, for example.
This seems to be an excellent proposal. But why does the hon. gentleman not go a step further? Why do we not have a committee of this house charged with the responsibility of reviewing these matters? I think this parliament should be used. I think there are plenty of people in parliament with experience in these matters who could contribute, not only by making complaints about some of the things which are wrong but, and this is far more important, by helping toward the development of the positive approach of which the minister speaks.
There is one thing which is perfectly obvious. It is that in a sense immigration policy depends upon and is a function of our general over-all economic policy. If we have an


expanding economy there is no problem about getting skilled immigrants to this country. If we have adequate social security measures we do not need to worry about promotional campaigns. Why has there been such a tremendous influx of immigrants into France, Germany and other countries in northern Europe from Italy, Greece and Turkey? No elaborate promotional campaigns were needed. What these countries had were expanding economies and opportunities, and this is a situation which is essential. We can talk as much as we like, but unless there are opportunities available to them, immigrants are not attracted.
The reverse is also true. As long as we have a substantial pool of unemployment in this country the pressure against a liberal immigration policy will be tremendous. It is bound to be so. We have seen it again and again. In times of economic stagnation the minister will be under constant pressure to turn off the tap, to use one of his own expressions; and he certainly has all the means of turning off the tap at his disposal if need be. I welcome this new positive approach and the changes in organization and staffing, both badly needed, which we understand are to be carried out. This approach is useful and worth while, and I wish the minister luck in carrying it out effectively because it is certainly a move in the right direction.
I have no wish to discuss for very long the lengthy passages in his speech in which the minister dealt with the immigration of Chinese from Hong Kong, because I do not regard this as simply a problem involving the Chinese. I regret very much that the only change which is proposed in the regulations should be a minuscule change, namely that females- to adopt the elegant word which was used- can sponsor male fiances, or their entry into this country, whereas hitherto there was apparently discrimination based upon sex. We are all happy to know that this discrimination is to be removed. But if this makes any substantial difference to the situation I shall be surprised. I doubt whether there are enough Chinese females of marriageable age with the ability to attract these young men from Hong Kong to make this change in the regulations more than a tiny gesture.
The minister has, in this instance, frankly stated that he is not recommending that sponsorship privileges for Chinese be extended to cover the admission of brothers, sisters and more distant relatives. That statement, and the regulations which underline it, perpetuate a discrimination which is based, if you like,

on geographical grounds but in reality on racial grounds. It represents the survival in these regulations of racial discrimination.
I have heard the Prime Minister speak on this subject. I have heard the former minister of citizenship and immigration do the same. They together, I imagine, with the present minister, are enlightened men who say they do not have anything to do with discrimination. I remember the Prime Minister speaking heatedly about some United States legislation which continued discrimination on racial grounds. What are the circumstances here? I want the committee to appreciate this. Perhaps the committee does appreciate it already; it is written into the regulations. We do not need to wait for a new session of parliament or for legislation on other items to be completed before we can deal with it. It could be done by order in council with the stroke of a pen. But it is not being done. What is the situation today? Regulation 31(d) states, with application to persons permitted to land in Canada:
a person who is a citizen of any country of Europe, including Turkey; or of any country of North, Central or South America or islands adjacent thereto; or of Egypt, Israel or Lebanon, if such person is:
(i)	the son, daughter, brother or sister, as well as the husband or wife and the unmarried son or daughter under twenty one years of age of any such son, daughter, brother or sister, as the case may be; or
(ii)	the unmarried orphan nephew or niece under twenty one years of age, or fianc6 of a Canadian citizen or of a person legally admitted to Canada for permanent residence, who is residing in Canada and who has applied for such person-
And so on. And that excludes not just China and Hong Kong. It excludes all of Asia with the exception perhaps of Lebanon and Israel, and apparently all of Africa, too, which is the largest continent of the world, a continent whose people are now seeking a place in the sun. They are conscious of discrimination in all these countries.
Under regulation 31(c) the group of people who can be brought in from Asia and Africa is far more restricted. If I come from Poland, for example, I can bring my brother and sister into Canada, subject to the other qualifications, of course. If I come from Lebanon, or Israel, or Egypt or any part of Central or South America I can bring one group of my relatives to this country providing the other qualifications are met. But if I happen to come from Asia or from Africa-and I use those words generally-or from China or Japan-


An hon. Member:: India.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Francis Andrew Brewin: Or from India-this government takes a particular interest in Malaysia; we are very sympathetic toward Malaysia, apparently, but we say "You are in an inferior position as far as admission to Canada is concerned". I say this provision should be taken out of the regulations, and taken out now. The minister talks about allowing female financees to bring prospective husbands into the country. The labouring mountain has produced a little mouse. We are still keeping right in these regulations, bold and clear, a provision that if you come from one part of the world you are in one class, while if you come from another part of the world you are in another class and may not bring your relatives here to the same extent.
I say, Mr. Chairman, that this discrimination ought to be removed from the act, and no administrative problem about finding out what the Chinese relationships are should justify the maintenance of this trace of discrimination. Well, Mr. Chairman, "trace" is understating it; this is discrimination against the majority of the people in this world. I think if you add the Asians and the Africans together, it is precisely that. I do not know what the exact figures are because I have not counted them up, but I think you will find it is discrimination against the majority. There may well be administrative problems or difficulty in knowing who is the brother or sister of someone in Hong Kong when a person has lost his papers. There is no justification in this, though, for discrimination and the same treatment should be extended to all. If they want to narrow the classes-I would be very sorry to see them narrowed; I think that would be a great mistake-at least the same rule should apply to both groups of people. As I say, Mr. Chairman, I am very, very disappointed that this change has not been made.
I did notice that in his statement to the committee the minister made the following bow to the criticisms that have been made in this house. He said that some members of parliament have made representations with regard to certain sections of the present Immigration Act, and some have introduced private bills. Then he went on to say "Let me say I am in sympathy with many of the points raised".
I say to the minister that I appreciate his sympathy, but that sympathy must be translated into actions. It is no good saying one is sympathetic to these points. I think there is an old expression to the effect that sympathy does not butter parsnips, or something like
6832	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration that. We have to have more than sympathy. Then the minister said he thought most members would agree that there are many interrelationships between various sections of the act and isolated amendments which, while perhaps appropriate in respect of one or more particular problem, could have unfortunate effects in other areas. Then he said that all the points raised from outside the department as well as from within were being carefully noted and he would shortly assign priorities for detailed studies of the changes suggested and required. The minister said that following this he would expect to introduce a revised act for the consideration of parliament as soon as possible.
Surely, Mr. Chairman, we do not need to worry about assigning priorities when the courts of this country as well as members of this house have again and again expressed, in the most clearcut terms as far as members of this house are concerned and in the solemn judgments of the highest courts of the land, that there are basic deficiencies in the present administration. I would like to ask the minister whether it is not a fact that the majority of people who are excluded or deported from this country are excluded or deported on the ground that they do not have immigrant visas or on the ground that they do not have medical certificates. I know there are many such cases; I do not know whether they constitute a majority. They are not prohibited from entering this country by any of the provisions in the act but because they have not a piece of paper, which is not given to them and is refused them, or they have not had a medical examination, which is refused them under the act.
The courts again and again, as long ago as 1931, have said that this procedure of not giving the grounds for deportation is wrong; they called it hugger-mugger, farcical. How many priorities do you have to assign; how many studies do you have to make, to determine that this procedure is wrong? This has been stated in this house a number of times. I regret that all the minister can say is that he is going to assign priorities shortly and expects to introduce a revised act. A revised act is urgently needed, not only to deal with these major points but to tidy up all sorts of other points.
I had a case just the other day of a Canadian citizen who wanted to bring his wife back from Ireland, where he had married her. Because she had a mild epilepsy she was excluded from coming to Canada. The family is kept apart. The minister cannot do any-


thing about it-although he could issue a permit-because she is within a prohibited class. This man is well able to look after his wife. She is a mild case and is well able to be treated in this country. He happens to be a journalist. He cannot bring his wife into Canada except as a temporary visitor, and as a temporary visitor she cannot obtain hospital insurance and it is dubious whether the children would receive family allowance.
I am sure the minister and his staff would be the first to agree that this provision is a survival of an attitude that is no longer up to date, is neither humanitarian nor sensible. This sort of thing should be changed. Then we have exclusion because of "insanity." Persons are not permitted to enter this country if they have ever had enough sense to go to a mental institution for a check-up. That is practically the position. I forget the exact phraseology in the act, but one of the groups of people excluded are those who "have been insane at any time". All the medical men will tell you that it is a ridiculous definition; and sometimes it is assumed that you are insane. You are asked the question, "Have you ever been in a mental institution?" A lot of us, possibly, would be well advised to have a check-up in this respect from time to time. But you can be perfectly healthy and capable, a sane and reasonable person, and because of this provision in the act, which does not make sense any more today, you are excluded from entering this country.
The act should be carefully revised. I hope it will not be a question of the minister expecting to introduce a revised act. I hope he will make that firmer and say he will introduce a revised act, and that this is an A1 priority for his department. I also hope this matter will receive a lot more than sympathy. When the minister gets this draft act I hope he will submit it to a committee of parliament which can look into it carefully and make suggestions and revisions. Then we would have an immigration act that instead of being antiquated would be something we could be proud of.
There are one or two other matters I wanted to refer to in my remarks, Mr. Chairman. I believe I have a few more minutes. I wonder whether the minister would tell us what he means by the term "skilled". Perhaps he would give us a little more detail in this connection. He said in his statement that the term "skilled" includes those with a reasonably good level of education sufficient to permit a range of mobility and adaptability required in most occupations today. It would

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
be most helpful if we knew what is regarded as a reasonably good level of education.
While on that point, Mr. Chairman, the minister referred somewhere in his remarks to the difficulties that have arisen because of sponsorship. He said the qualifications for sponsorship were being dealt with inconsistently by different immigration officers. He referred to the fact that standards, which are essentially financial, were put into effect last February upon his arrival in the department.
I wonder whether the minister would table in this house, or make available to members, the standards which were put into effect last February. I know many would-be immigrants have received letters saying "Your sponsorship application is rejected because it does not meet requirements". In most of those letters I have not seen any attempt to tell them what changes are required. I think it would be extremely helpful not only to the members of this house but to all who deal with these matters if the minister were to set out for us the actual requirements.
The minister referred to another matter in rather harsh terms. He spoke of queue jumping. I understand the meaning of queue jumping involves the people coming into this country as visitors, and their desire to stay here and apply for citizenship rather than go back to their country of origin. I appeal to the minister to attempt to find some satisfactory solution to this problem, because section 7, subsection 3 of the Immigration Act itself specifically provides that when a person comes into Canada as a non-immigrant he has a right to report such fact, if he wants to stay, to the nearest immigration officer and present himself for examination at such place and time as may be directed, and that for the purposes under this act, he shall be deemed to be a person seeking admission to Canada.
I am absolutely convinced, Mr. Chairman, that parliament when it enacted that provision intended that if a visitor to Canada for some reason wanted to stay in Canada he should have the right to take his case and have it dealt with in Canada without having to return to his country of origin. I have in mind an individual who, while in Canada, becomes engaged, is offered a job, or who has been a student and, following graduation, desires to stay and work in Canada. I think it was the intention of parliament to give this right to these individuals, provided they are not in a prohibited class, and are qualified for entry.
I understand there is a great problem involved in respect of the machinery of the department, particularly in relation to the admissibility of immigrants. I realize that there are many problems when the department insist on a visitor going through all the requirements following an application for permanent admission. I know it is difficult to carry out the very careful inquiries which must be made, but I feel there must be some solution to these problems.
I would ask hon. members and the minister what would happen if they found themselves in the position of many of these visitors to Canada. I can imagine some of us being unmarried and having a desire to marry someone we met while visiting in another country. If we invited them to Canada as visitors and they decided to live here, how frustrating for the fiancee it would be to have to return to her country of origin and make application for admission to Canada. I can imagine how frustrating it must be for an individual in Canada who met and desired to marry someone from another country, having to send that individual back to the country of origin to make application for citizenship. This is clearly an unsatisfactory situation, and I feel it should be looked into very carefully.
I am wondering whether some method could be found to enable visitors to Canada, who desire to stay, to make application while in this country without having to return to the country of origin. Perhaps the examination carried out in respect of visitors to Canada could be more stringent, but having allowed the visitors in, they should be permitted to make application for citizenship while in Canada. I feel these individuals should have their cases examined as quickly as possible without the necessity of returning to their original homes and making application in the normal manner. After all, I feel it is a compliment to Canada when an individual seeks permission to remain here.
Mr. Chairman, I hope the minister will consider this situation in an attempt to find a solution to this problem, because at the present time the provisions of section 7, subsection 3 of the Immigration Act are being disregarded, and the right that can be conferred by the provisions of that section is not being followed at all.
Mr. Chairman, I have perhaps detained the committee long enough, and it would be repetitious for me to suggest to the minister that if he really wants to achieve the reputation, which I hope he will, of a minister who has cleaned up the immigration laws,
6834	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration I think he should seriously consider the remarks that have been made in this house during this debate. I am sure the minister has consulted Mr. Sedgwick, an eminent lawyer from Toronto. I am sure Mr. Sedgwick would tell the minister that many of the procedures now followed are inconsistent with the bill of rights and fundamental principles of justice. I am sure the minister will listen to these remarks and not allow the difficulties and problems that exist to stand in the way of fair and just administration of our immigration laws.
I conclude, Mr. Chairman, by saying that while I commend the minister for his statement, he must go much further than he has to achieve the results required. I hope he has no delusions in this regard.


Alexander Bell Patterson: Mr. Chairman, we appreciate the statement made by the minister in introducing his estimates. I am sure everyone followed with interest the rather lengthy presentation of the immigration picture in Canada today. I must agree with other speakers who have participated in this debate and who have suggested that there was not much indication in his statement of what he intends to do in the future. A great deal of emphasis was placed on plans the department is preparing, but there were no concrete proposals.
I believe this department has a very important role to play in the continued development of Canada. As a nation, Canada has tremendous prospective absorption possibilities. The population of Canada is very limited, being of the order of 19 million. Canada has vast geographic proportions and I feel can absorb a great number of immigrants and can do so very rapidly. I am sure everyone recognizes the necessity of increasing our population in order to develop markets adequate to absorb our production. There is a great deal of emphasis placed on overseas markets. We must dispose of our produce. I am sure we can do so by creating larger markets within our own borders. I think our domestic markets would grow following the adoption of the suggested new immigration policy, allowing people into Canada who will accept the responsibilities as well as the privileges of citizenship in this great country of ours.
The minister outlined the steps he proposed to take to improve immigration facilities. He referred to an interdepartmental committee as being a method of meeting the needs and demands in this respect. I think this is a very good suggestion and will help to alleviate the poor situation now in existence.


I think one of the most important things to do in respect of the promotional campaign he mentioned, is to develop this country, and by practical steps to show other people exactly what Canada is and what it can become. This cannot be done through the use of propaganda. We in this country do know of our vast resources and productive capacity. I am sure we can achieve a greater degree of development and progress than has been achieved to the present time. I am sure one of the ways of doing this is by bringing people into this country who will develop the nation as quickly as possible. I think when this development has taken place the example will be obvious to all countries of the world.
Not only must there be adequate policies in respect of immigration, the policies must be co-ordinated with those of every government department. I do not think it is possible for the minister and his department alone to do the job which must be done. As I pointed out before, there is a tremendous amount of development and progress needed to achieve the desired results. I feel there must be a correlation of policies of all departments in order to bring this about. Generally speaking I have found the officials of the immigration branch quite co-operative with regard to the matters I have discussed with them, but I believe that in many instances they are hampered by legislation and regulations that are in the main too restrictive in their nature. This has been referred to by the speakers who have preceded me. 1 am not going to labour the point but I believe there must be an opening up, a liberalization of the legislation and rules and regulations in order to make them more effective and to do the job that we believe the immigration department should do in this particular field.
The minister dealt mainly with immigration. I realize that this is a very important phase of his departmental responsibilities, but I believe that attention should be given to the requirements, privileges and responsibilities of Canadian citizenship. It is not sufficient just to bring people into Canada. It is not sufficient just to encourage them to come here and take up residence within our nation. I believe that the responsibilities of citizenship should be impressed upon them. In this regard I refer not only to new immigrants. I believe that all the people of Canada should realize that in accepting the privileges and benefits that are theirs within the borders of our country they must also be prepared to accept the responsibilities of citizenship. I have

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
raised this matter before and I believe it is a subject which should receive a great deal more consideration than it has up to the present time.
In making his statement the minister indicated he was not going to refer at this time to his responsibilities with respect to Indian affairs but would reserve his statement on that matter until we come to that branch. I believe that is desirable and makes for more effective debate.
Extensive debate has already taken place on interim supply motions with regard to immigration, and our participation in the debate at this time is going to be very limited. However there is one other point to which I should like to refer. The minister mentioned revision of the act. It would appear that this is highly desirable not only for the purpose of making the necessary changes that are required but also for the purpose of making the whole act more readable and more understandable and in that way making it more effective in accomplishing the particular task.
We would urge the minister to continue his diligent attention to these particular fields. I think it is absolutely essential to remember that especially in this department the human factor is of primary importance.


Mr. Hahn:: Mr. Chairman, in speaking on the estimates of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration I do not want to take a lot of time. I was very glad to hear the minister state that the policy of the department is going to be a positive rather than a negative one and that we are actively going out to seek new immigrants for this country. Too often in the past I have felt that the department-when I say "department" I mean a combination of the legislation, the regulations and the department itself-has tended to act not as a pump drawing people into our country but more as a wall trying to keep them out. I hope and expect from the minister's statement that this will end.
There are three specific items that have been touched on about which I should like to make a few remarks. First of all, the hon. member for Greenwood raised the problem of geographic and racial discrimination in our immigration policy. I can only agree with him that I think this is wrong. I believe this is something that is not in keeping with the image of our country we want to present abroad and I do not think it is in keeping with the view of our attitudes that we ourselves have within our country. So I would ask the minister to regard this problem as a problem, and see if something cannot be
done about it. I say again that the arguments presented by the hon. member for Greenwood made a lot of sense to me and I would hope that consideration might be given to them.
The second problem I should like to speak about briefly is that of immigrants from behind the iron curtain. As I understand the regulations, people within a certain age group are not admitted to this country because we are unable to find out anything about them. We do not know whether they are acceptable from a security point of view. It seems to me that because we are unable to prove the case for admission of these people we are in a position of having to assume the case against. We cannot prove they are fit immigrants for the country so we say that they must be unfit.
I am fully aware of the security problems involved. On the other hand, I do think there is something that might be done which has not been done in the past. Instead of looking only to the immigrant himself as a source of information about his character I think we might look to this end of the story. We might look to the sort of people who are sponsoring the immigrant. If we are going to bring somebody from behind the iron curtain to this country, and the people who are sponsoring him, the family with whom he is going to live, are people of good character and of industry who have established themselves as good citizens of this country, surely we should be able to give some consideration to the risk involved in bringing a person into that environment. If we have confidence, as I do, in our system of life in this country I think we should not be afraid of bringing somebody who might possibly be a communist into this type of environment, in the hope that our system would commend itself to the immigrant. So I would urge the department to look at the problem not only from the point of view of trying to find out information about the prospective immigrant in ^ his country of origin but also from the point of view of the environment here to which the immigrant is coming, and see if we cannot establish some yardsticks on that basis that might allow some of these people into the country, that might allow some family reunions which, based on the experience of the cases I have had, I think should take place.
The third point I should like to raise deals with the problem of mental illness. This is the subject of a private member's bill which I have on the order paper, but the way the schedule is going I do not think there is a
6836	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration chance that the bill will come up for debate this session. It was on the order paper last session but did not come up then either.
I think the easiest way for me to describe this problem is to cite the case history that first brought the problem to my attention. I refer to the case of a man who during the war lost his family and wandered throughout war torn Europe. After the war he was able to obtain certain skills as an electrician and became engaged to be married to a girl. His engagement was broken and he came to Canada in 1953. Shortly after he arrived in this country he had a nervous or mental breakdown and went into a mental hospital. There he stayed for a period of a couple of months, I believe. Since that time this man has established himself in this country. He has worked steadily since 1953, a period of 11 years now, and there has been absolutely no problem at all in terms of his mental health. He has had recent examinations by psychiatrists and they have indicated that his previous problem was the result of the upbringing he had during the war, the breaking up of his family, the loss of his parents, the breaking of his engagement and then suddenly being transplanted to this environment. The pressures were too great. But since that time he has re-established himself and from current psychiatric examinations the indications are that he is probably as good or a better risk than most people in this country today. This man is under an order of deportation.
Now, it is true this order of deportation will not be exercised. Indeed it cannot be exercised because there is no place we can send him. He is now a resident of Canada. It is fine to say to the man: You do not have to worry; you can stay here all the rest of your life. The order of deportation will not he exercised. This may seem like a reasonable thing to say. However in my opinion it is not. This man cannot become a Canadian citizen or become the citizen of any country. He cannot get a passport as you and I can to visit other countries. He is denied many of the rights that we, as Canadians, have. He is denied these rights under the Immigration Act, and not just for today or tomorrow; he is denied them all the rest of his life.
He wants to get married and raise a family. However he refuses to do so under these circumstances. He does not want to bring up children and have to try to explain to those children why he cannot go to Europe like other Canadians, or hold a passport from

this country. I do not believe this is good enough. I believe that the legislation, as it is drafted now, fails to take into account the advancements that have been made in connection with the problem of mental illness. It fails to recognize what all other institutions in our society seem to recognize, that is that mental illness can be cured. We allow a prisoner who has been in our prisons, but who has rehabilitated himself, to become a Canadian citizen. I believe we should do the same thing for people who have been unfortunate enough to have had mental problems. I think we should recognize that these people can be cured, and after adequate proof of cure I think we should then return them to full status as Canadians. I believe that to do less is not in keeping with our attitudes in this country. I urge the minister, when he is making his revision of the Immigration Act, to bring this section up to date because in my opinion it is almost reminiscent of the middle ages. A change should be made so that a mental patient receives proper treatment in this country.


Mr. Mandziuk:: I wish to associate myself, Mr. Chairman, with the remarks of the previous speaker, who made some very good suggestions. I hope the minister takes note of them. I wish to congratulate particularly the hon. member for Edmonton East for his remarks because when we are considering the extension of immigration quotas for people from other lands, I believe the department would be well advised to co-operate more fully with the Department of Industry so these people can make use of their skills when they arrive in Canada.
My remarks I hope will be brief because I intend to refer to that branch of the department which has responsibility for the Indian population in Canada. The minister's introductory remarks were quite extensive and he should be complimented. He covered a great deal of territory. We find champions for almost everything in Canada. We find people who champion the cause of law breakers, people who come into Canada illegally. We are so careful, and we want to give them free legal advice and see they are comfortably housed in our prisons. We want to see that they get the proper bail. We have champions for those who deliberately take the life of another. Just a short time ago an organization was established in Canada to lobby for the abolition of capital punishment. Canada sends a great deal of money to the underdeveloped nations through the Colombo plan.

Who does champion the cause of the Indians? We have almost a quarter of a million of these people in Canada. There was a time when we thought they were faced with extinction. However the Indian population is increasing and we have them in every province. I have some in my constituency, approximately 1,300 men, women and children scattered over five reserves. It is with these people I am familiar, but I think the same situation exists in every part of Canada in so far as our Indians are concerned.
I was particularly intrigued by a centennial project initiated by the Saskatchewan wheat pool, Mr. Chairman, and I wish to make a short reference to it. The Saskatchewan wheat pool has initiated what they call a conference and trade centre to be built in Saskatoon. The federal-provincial contribution will be $92,000 and public contributions will amount to around $150,000. This building is for the purpose of teaching the Indians in order to bridge the gap between the different cultures, thus enabling these Indians to lead a richer life. These short courses are going to be five or ten days, or perhaps of two weeks duration and will be given to Indians of all ages. The Saskatchewan wheat pool is to be commended for initiating such a project. I fail to see why this example could not be followed up by the government, instead of neglecting this section of our population as we do.
Now, Mr. Chairman, these are first Canadians. Away back almost 500 years ago when the first white man came to this country, the Indians had a culture. They had reached a certain level of civilization. They did not have a common language but they had an organized government and some ideas for practising democracy. One does not need to stretch his imagination too far to visualize what would have happened if the white man had not come and this Indian population, simply by a process of evolution, had been allowed to progress culturally. One wonders if these people would not have reached, by this time, a much higher level than some of the multitribal nations in Africa. I have great respect for the intelligence of these people. However, today they have no ambition. I think we have destroyed that.
What have we given the Indian? We have put him in a reserve, in a ghetto. We have destroyed his pride of race. We have destroyed his initiative. We have destroyed his ambition to do better because all we hand out to him is a relief voucher. He lives from day to day because he knows the little white
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration father, the government, is going to take care of him. I admit that the schools on the various reserves are trying to do a good job. I commend the department for having started an experiment several years ago, namely encouraging the integration of the Indian boys and girls into our public school system.
I speak from experience because from one large Indian reserve in my riding a number of children were brought into our public schools, and from the conversations I have had with the board of trustees and the teachers, I learn they are making satisfactory progress. This experiment should be extended to the full. We should do away with the idea of the one room school on the Indian reserve where at times it is most difficult to secure a qualified teacher.
Some of the residential schools are also doing a wonderful job, and in my constituency the Birtle residential school is doing a magnificent job. We must achieve integration for the Indians. We must destroy any suspicions we have had. We must restore the Indian's confidence in himself so that when he gets education he may qualify for better positions. Educated Indians will become leaders in their communities, and I believe the project which the Saskatchewan wheat pool has initiated is a good one, which could be copied by many other parts of Canada.
Indian affairs are in no way related to citizenship and immigration. Citizenship and immigration are two subjects, related to each other, and I would suggest that the government give consideration to establishing an Indian affairs department. It might be created by providing for an associate minister of citizenship and immigration who would give his full time to Indian affairs.
Indian reserves are scattered all over the nation. Suggestions have been made that they be abolished, and the Indians have gone up in arms over those suggestions. Outside of striving to integrate some of the young we are not doing a thing to encourage Indians to establish themselves on the land that is presently cultivated by the whites. There are thousands of acres of good arable farmland rented by white farmers, on an acreage fee or on a share basis. Is it not about time we took steps to prepare the Indians to take over this land? It is their land, and if they worked it it would put an end to the spectacle of Indians waiting for relief vouchers.
An associate minister of Indian affairs would assist the minister greatly. At present the department is too big for one man to handle. It is a troika, as Khrushchev would
6838	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration say, and in no way are Indians connected with citizenship and immigration. They do not have to be naturalized; they are the first citizens of this nation.
Several years ago, probably intended as an experiment and on the recommendation of the departmental heads, a change was made by taking the Indian agent off the reserve and putting him as far away as possible, presumably with the idea of encouraging the Indian to be self-supporting and to depend on himself and his band. In some instances in my riding the Indian agent is 40 or 50 miles away from the reserve to which he is assigned. In fact the nearest agent to a reserve is 50 miles away. The Indian has been in the habit of coming to the agent and regarding him as a father confessor, telling the agent all his problems, grievances and beefs. I know it is not pleasant for an Indian agent to live on a reserve ostracized from white society, but this is one of the hazards of his job, and I feel he should be as close as possible to the reserve, if not actually on it.
The Indian never goes anywhere without dragging his family along with him. You will see an Indian and his wife sitting on the roadside trying to hitchhike a ride to see the Indian agent. If they can afford the bus fare they travel that way, but the agent should be nearer to them.
I do not know what qualifications are expected of Indian agents. I am not offering any criticism of any agent I know personally, but I believe the agent has to be a teacher. He should also be an agricultural expert so that he may encourage Indians to make use of the land on which they reside. By competition he should instil in the Indian ambition to own, to possess something, rather than be content to carry on day by day without any hope for the future.
We have to have more houses on Indian reserves. If we have millions of dollars to spend for everything else then we must also have them for these people. We have put these people on reserves, and you should see the conditions under which many of them live. We worry about what is going on in Malaysia and Africa; I say let us start worrying about what is going on at our own back door or front door. Surely we can give better dwellings to the Indians, many of whom are living in hovels, log cabins with barely a covering on them, with broken window panes and bad floors. These are a blot on our civilization.
Let us try to integrate the Indians into our way of life. Let us get them into our

public schools. Let us put dedicated Indian agents on our reserves. Let us bring the Indian to a level where he does not suffer from an inferiority complex. If that is done the department will be accomplishing something. I hope the minister will keep some of these suggestions in mind. They are important, and this is a segment of our population which we must attend to if we want to present a respectable face to the rest of the world.


Mr. Choquefie:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few brief comments on a subject which we are too often inclined to treat lightly, whereas it is the most essential subject to be found in this country, and I refer to immigration in so far as it relates to the demographic composition of Canada.
In accordance with our best traditions and by way of introduction, I should like to begin by congratulating the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, of whom we have reason to be proud.
Not too long ago, I had the opportunity to witness one of his performances on television, when he faced a panel of interviewers who stuck to their guns rather hard, and I was able to see how masterfully he handled their questions, which is altogether in keeping with his great ability and exceptional talent.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Auguste Choquette: I am pleased to hear the applause of my colleagues, because what I have to say later on might not meet with their approval.
The immigration problem is surely one of the most difficult for French Canada. It is obvious that our country can admit a very great number of immigrants, but it is also obvious, unfortunately, that immigration has never favoured the French speaking group. Figures are there to prove it.
I put on the order paper several questions regarding immigration, in order to learn how many immigrants have been admitted and have settled here since the beginning of the century. In those questions I was asking for the number of French speaking and English speaking Canadians; this would definitely show that the French speaking element has been reduced, through immigration, to a very alarming extent.
We believe in the dual language character of our country. Many people say that they want to accept the bilingual and bicultural fact. We probably find this good will every-

where, but even if those high-sounding principles were broadcast from coast to coast, from Newfoundland to British Columbia, if
the French speaking element is constantly losing ground in Canada from a demographic point of view, the day will come when it will be absolutely useless to speak of bilingualism or biculturalism, for there will no longer be any French speaking element.
Then I shall appeal to any Canadian citizen to come to our assistance in the province of Quebec, in order to fight those who exploit prejudice and those who would like to drive our compatriots into breaking up our confederation. We are able to face up with the utmost energy and courage to those who resort to prejudice, but we want also to provide them with acceptable arguments in order to prove to them that confederation is to our advantage and not to our disadvantage, as they try to make us believe by foul and surreptitious means.
Mr. Chairman, the facts show that: Since 1946, Canada has welcomed 2,200,000 immigrants, of whom 650,000 were British, 270,000 German, 320,000 Italian, 160,000 Dutch, etc. and as far as the French speaking immigrants are concerned, they numbered fewer than 70,000.
It is clear that in the circumstances, a large proportion of immigrants is drawn to the majority group and inclined to identify itself with, and become part of that group, for which they can hardly be blamed.
But the point I would like to submit, Mr. Chairman, is that to the extent the French minorities in the nine other provinces are strengthened, become strong and actively dynamic, we shall be able, not only to fight, but to eliminate separatists, by telling them: If Quebec should separate there would still be a strong French speaking minority to denounce them as traitors and renegades. But, if the French speaking minorities in the remainder of this country are inexistent, the separatists will then gain the support of those who are weak enough to yield to their arguments.
My impression is that if we really want to establish a biethnic country, I think the area where this principle should be confirmed is the Immigration Act, where the demographic balance could be considered in one way or the other.
It is by laying down that biethnical principle, by recognizing it in the Immigration Act, that we will assert ourselves. And that, all the much more if it is recognized that
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration bilingualism and biculturalism prevail in this country.
I would be remiss if I failed to deplore the lack of interest shown by the government of the province of Quebec in regard to immigration. That government was at fault, altogether. Certainly, such a lack of interest is consistent with the theories expressed not too long ago by the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot (Mr. Ricard) who seemed to be afraid of the fact that Algerian immigrants were to settle in the province of Quebec. It is because of such obsolete and out of date prejudices that we have continually lost ground as far as immigration is concerned.
I have here a booklet written by Jean-Marc Leger, who is particularly interested in the problems of immigration and he wrote this:
But there is a general complaint and also a general surprise: "French Canadians always speak to us in English. Even when we address them in French, if they detect a foreign accent or a certain slowness of speech, they immediately switch to English.
Here I speak on behalf of the immigrants who come to Canada and are surprised to see that as soon as French speaking Canadians realize that their name has a foreign sound they have a tendency to speak to them in English.
French Canadians show a lot of thoughtlessness which should be remedied if we want our grievances to be justified and accepted.
And Mr. Leger continues:
In other circumstances, our people will consider new Canadians as English speaking people when it comes to the distribution of pamphlets or booklets published in French and in English. In a hotel or on a streetcar, in a restaurant or in a store, the name or the accent of a new Canadian will immediately encourage the French Canadian employee to carry the conversation in English.
The situation is so ridiculous that some of our fellow citizens speak in English to French immigrants with Basque or Alsatian names.
And Mr. Leger said further that this xenophobia has always existed among a great number of us and, as a result, the immigrant did not feel at home when he came to live in Quebec.
It is on account of speeches such as those delivered by a former minister of the crown that immigrants are reluctant to come and live in Canada and more especially in the province of Quebec. It is on account of that backward attitude that immigration has always been unfavourable to French Canada.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few remarks. If we really want Quebec to develop within confederation, the dual language principle should definitely be
6840	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration included in the Immigration Act in one way or another.
Second, I think we would be justified in asking that the demographic balance, which was momentarily upset following massive immigration into Canada since the turn of the century, be corrected in some way so that the French minorities, as I was saying a moment ago, be strengthened numerically in the English speaking provinces. Then we would be in a position to say to the Quebec separatists: you have people in the other provinces who are speaking your language and have your culture and with whom we must make common cause in order to become true Canadians worthy of the name.


Gérald Laniel: Mr. Chairman, could I ask a question of the hon. member for Lotbiniere? [Translation]


Auguste Choquette: If my hon. colleague will be kind enough to let me complete my remarks, then he may ask questions.


Gérald Laniel: I would like to ask the hon. member-


Auguste Choquette: I will answer your question at the end of my remarks.
Mr. Chairman, may I submit a third suggestion? I wonder if it would be so unpleasant to consider the following possibility: the law requires that when an immigrant becomes a naturalized Canadian, he must have a sufficient knowledge of one of the two official languages in Canada. Would it be so unreasonable to demand that a part from a sufficient knowledge of one of the two official languages in this country, the immigrant should also have a basic knowledge of the second official language in Canada, because after all when he has been living for five years in a bietihnical and bicultural country, it seems to me that he should have an idea of the second culture and the second official language of that country.
And as a fourth suggestion-I do not know whether this would meet completely the ideas of the minister-I have the impression that the demographic make-up in a country is so primordial and vital that I feel we should have a parliamentary committee on immigration. This is a personal opinion that I am voicing-


Gordon Minto Churchill: Why not one on the flag,
too?


Auguste Choquette: Mr. Chairman, I am happy that this intervention of my hon. colleague


from Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Churchill) takes place now because I think he will cry out even more when he hears my fifth suggestion.
I belong to the younger generation, and we consider ourselves essentially Canadian everywhere; we respect the feelings and the principles of the older and more experienced generation who believes in ties and symbols which to our minds, are the badge of colonialism.
I believe that we of the younger generation must respect the feelings of the older generation but our generation must not be accused of being revolutionary because it wants to eliminate all colonialism symbols. We want our country to be essentially Canadian. There is a provision in the Immigration Act whereby every Canadian citizen is a British subject. I recognize that that may please a great number of Canadians, but you cannot blame the young people of my generation if they believe that the fact that we are subjects of another country constitutes a tie of bondage of one country to the other. In my opinion, we should be essentially Canadian, Canadian citizens, and if we want to pay respect to the crown presiding over the commonwealth, why could not all commonwealth nations grant mutual citizenship instead of giving recognition by legislation to a tie of servitude?


Herman Maxwell Batten: The hon. member for Beauharnois-Salaberry.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, I would ask the minister why he-
(Translation)


Gérald Laniel: I should like to direct a question to the hon. member for Lotbiniere.
(Text)


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, did you not give me the floor?


Gérald Laniel: I have a question for the hon. member for Lotbiniere.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I see. All right.


Gérald Laniel: Is the hon. member for Lotbiniere not of the opinion that there would be another way to increase the French Canadian population in this country, that is by a natural way? The hon. members are wondering if he is not himself giving the lie to the statements made by the hon. member for York-Humber (Mr. Cowan).


Mr, Choquelte:: Mr. Chairman, I think Trench Canadians have resorted to this means more than they should. There is an old saying about the revenge of the cradle. Today, it is powerless to compete with the constant flow of immigrants.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I wanted to ask the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, what is the reason for the activity of his colleagues today who were so strangely silent on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of this week? They are now conducting an apparently organized filibuster of his estimates, and he does not seem to have the confidence of his party.


Some hon. Members:: Sit down.


Mr. Webster:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make a few remarks regarding education among our Indian youth. A most outstanding development of school administration in recent years has been the enrolment of native children into non-Indian schools. Last year this trend affected 36 per cent of more than
50,000	young people from the reserves. This required 157 joint school agreements with provincial and local authorities-an excellent example of federal-provincial co-operation in providing an important community service. However, I would remind the minister that the Glassco commission recommended "the more rapid development of school integration as worthy of top priority". I hope the appropriate authorities will act on this advice and encourage an increasing number of families to send their children to non-Indian schools.
Last year a delegation from British Columbia presented a brief to the government in which they urged "a stepped up program of vocational training for native boys and girls with spot centres in Indian districts". Facilities of this kind would provide training that would prepare young people for job opportunities that are now closed to them. This would do much to lessen the possibility of discrimination in the field of employment. Such a development would take place more generally with the building of more and more technical and vocational institutions across the country.
School drop-outs among Indian youth at the secondary school level across Canada can be described only as a tragedy. In 1960 according to government reports only 82 students were doing work beyond grade 12. Last year only 98 of our native population were in attendance at a Canadian university.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
Every effort should be made to encourage more bright young Indian students to take advantage of the scholarships and other forms of assistance that are available at the present time. I hope Professor Hawthorne and his associates will conduct a searching inquiry to discover the reasons for the excessively large number of drop-outs among native children in the secondary schools across Canada. This country needs the services of more educated young Indian boys and girls in industry, in business and in the public service.
The department is to be commended for its program in the field of adult education. Last year 2,061 men and women were enrolled in a variety of courses, many of the instructors being provided by the extension departments of the universities. This is excellent work in citizenship and occupational training and should be encouraged in every way. However the adult education program is handicapped by lack of native Indian teachers. More of these young people should be persuaded to enrol in teacher training institutions. At present there are 1,500 teachers in Indian schools but only 200 are natives themselves.
Finally may I urge greater attention to setting up more Indian friendship or social centres in thickly populated areas across Canada. Eleven cities have such meeting places now, as a result of the interest and initiative of local groups. Vancouver recently commenced a service of this kind through the action of enterprising citizens and local native people themselves. But they are having financial difficulties.
To an annual budget of $18,000, the department of indian affairs contributes only $5,000. I understand that this is the maximum amount paid to any of the centres in Canada. Surely they are deserving of more generous assistance through some public agency. I urge the minister to consider sympathetically future requests. The department should assume a greater share of the cost of supporting these important institutions.


Reynold Rapp: Mr. Chairman, I should like to take this opportunity to make a few remarks about the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. I represent a constituency in which a great number of citizens who have come from European countries live. Quite a number of them came from countries behind the iron curtain. I receive a great many letters from these people.
I must say that I have received a great deal of co-operation from the officials of this
6842	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration department, and only a short time ago one of my constituents required a Canadian citizenship certificate and passport in order to make a trip to his land of birth in Europe. As a result of the very quick work of the officials of the department this individual was able to obtain the documents.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to bring one further matter to the attention of the minister. Many of these people came to Canada about the turn of the century. Their passports and other documents were not satisfactory as far as the immigration officials were concerned. I think perhaps the officials should pay a little more attention to these people applying for certificates. Quite often they do not have the necessary information to obtain a passport or certificate of registration. In many instances the officials of the provincial and federal governments have co-operated in supplying the information needed. I have heard many complaints made by these people in respect of applications for citizenship papers. In many of these cases the people concerned have lived in Canada for quite some time and have not lost contact with their relatives and friends living in the country from which they came. Sometimes they make remarks, or express themselves in terms that could be misunderstood. They speak of the fine qualities of the countries in which they were born, indicating that even though some of these countries are behind the iron curtain conditions were quite favourable. They are in no way desirous of returning to those countries. I think immigration officials should keep in mind the difficulties some of these individuals face, when processing applications for citizenship. These people have close ties with relatives in Europe and find it very difficult to dissociate themselves from their origin.
I am aware of a man and wife who came to Canada many years ago and raised their children here. These children were all born in Canada. For some reason or other the father cannot obtain citizenship although his wife has become a citizen. I think cases of this kind should be considered, and some effort made to help these people obtain citizenship.
One other difficulty that has come to my attention involves recent arrivals to this country who have put money in travel bureaus, following which the travel bureaus have become bankrupt and they have lost their savings. One of these is the Atlas travel bureau of Toronto. I reported this situation to the department of immigration and received the reply that the companies


were private companies and the department had no jurisdiction. The department of immigration does look after the issuing of these registration certificates, and I think they should make some investigation of this type of thing.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to state that there are several Indian reservations in my constituency. Many of the Indians have asked to have the reservations enlarged. Some of these reservations are situated adjacent to crown owned land. These Indians find that they can no longer make a satisfactory living by trapping and fishing, and wish to commence farming. They need a little more land. I think the department should give some consideration to this request.
I should also like to direct the minister's attention to a matter in respect of passports. I travelled in Europe not so long ago as a member of the NATO delegation and I had no trouble whatever in those countries. The officials just looked at my passport and it was all right. But if you try to cross the border to the United States the first thing they ask you is not what country you are a citizen of but where you were born, and if you happen to say you were born in Russia their eyes pop out and you think that the next thing they will do is to put handcuffs on you. I think this could be very well avoided and that the first question should be as to your national status. Instead of inquiring about the place and date of your birth they should inquire about your citizenship and should not be concerned with where you were born and how you were born. I know the same thing has happened to many other people who have crossed from Canada to the United States. People are asked these questions and have to undergo the embarrassment of the officials looking a little more closely at your baggage and what-not. I think this should be corrected. That is all I have to say.


Mr. Rynard:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to touch briefly on a matter which I feel is of great concern to the people of Canada and has to do with immigration. I refer to the case of Mr. Harold Banks. I do not intend to rehash previous arguments about this man nor do I intend to express my opinion of the illegal action of the Liberal government which gave this man the status of a landed immigrant in Canada. But I should like to suggest a way that may free us of this man entirely.

I believe many people are unaware that when the previous government was in office the former minister of citizenship and immigration, Hon. Ellen Fairclough, refused to grant Mr. Banks citizenship. She did everything in her power to rectify the action of the previous government which had granted him landed status.
I believe that under the Immigration Act a landed immigrant who leaves Canada with the intention of living permanently outside of Canada loses the domicile he has attained, whether he has been in Canada one or ten years. I am not a lawyer and therefore cannot give a legal opinion, but I would think that if Mr. Banks is a fugitive from justice, if he has fled from Canada to the United States to avoid serving the 30 day sentence imposed upon him for contempt of court, this might easily be construed as leaving Canada with the intention of remaining permanently outside this country.
I suggest that the present Minister of Citizenship and Immigration should look into this matter most carefully. If Mr. Banks has indeed left the country and lost his domicile by so doing, then every effort should be made to ensure that if and when he applies for reentry into Canada he be required to meet every test applied to all immigrants coming here for the first time. If these tests are properly applied, I am sure he can be refused entry as a person convicted of crimes involving moral turpitude under section 5(d) of the Immigration Act.
Then there is also the Hooper case, the man who was detained in Don jail for 100 days because he refused to answer questions that were asked by an immigration officer. It is true that under a certain section of the Immigration Act an officer has the power to detain and that it is an offence to refuse to answer questions. However the act was passed long before the passage of the bill of rights, which guarantees certain freedoms. Is it in the spirit of the bill of rights to hold a club of possible imprisonment over the head of a man who refuses to testify against himself? Should a person suspected of being in this country illegally be forced to provide evidence on which his deportation can be ordered? Should not the same principle apply as applies in any other prosecution? The civil police must build up their own case against an accused. There is no provision in the Criminal Code as far as I know whereby a person can be jailed for failing to make a confession.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
Some people have suggested to me that so far as immigration is concerned they do not feel that the government is pursuing a sufficiently aggressive policy to bring immigrants into this country who are prepared to do manual work. I refer particularly to the field of agriculture, including gardeners, caretakers and manual workers. A great many fail on the tests of skills imposed by the department which are perhaps too severe under present conditions. Perhaps a plan along the lines suggested by some of the experts along those lines to bring in people from some countries who will do the manual jobs should be initiated by the minister of immigration.
I want to refer to the immigrants who have built up this country and to say first of all that actually the only citizens of this country are the North American or red Indians. All the rest of us are immigrants. The first immigrants, of course, were the French. They were followed by people from the United Kingdom. Then the United Empire Loyalists came to this country and they were composed of Germans as well as those of English stock. Then followed immigrants from the British Isles and then European immigrants in the main, until today in this country we have a million people of German descent, half a million Ukrainians, half a million Nether-landers, half a million Italians and many others totalling in all three million. The result is that today we have a country of minorities.
But I want to say that we cannot just thank federal governments for the policies of immigration and methods of bringing people into the country that have been initiated. I remember that in 1945 no move at all was being made to bring immigrants into the country and Hon. George Drew, who was premier of Ontario at that time, started an airlift. Within the space of a few months he brought in approximately 25,000 people. This demonstrated to the federal government that they would have to get off their seats and start moving.
Over the years since 1945 over 2i million immigrants have come to our shores and the province of Ontario from which I come has taken over half of them. Many of these immigrants who have come to Canada over the years have made substantial contributions to our economy. Names come to my mind such as Stephen Roman of Denison Consolidated, Romandale Farms and other enterprises. I think of the great contribution made by Mr. Koerner of British Columbia who established
6844	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration sawmills throughout that province and finally-created the Koerner foundation which has done so much to help the University of British Columbia and education generally in that province. Then there is the Bata firm from Czechoslovakia which founded a town in Ontario and established one of the great shoe factories in Canada. I think too of the Bick family who came from Holland. Mr. Bick came here as a market gardener in a modest way and gradually expanded his enterprises until he went into pickle manufacturing and is now one of the big pickle manufacturers on this continent.
Then, in so far as the farm sector is concerned, since 1945 immigrants have purchased lands worth over $100 million. I want to say, Mr. Chairman, that some of these farms would be abandoned today if it were not for these immigrants. Agriculture needs workers because of the older age group-in this industry.
It is in the professional field that I am particularly concerned. There were over
100,000	professional people who entered Canada since the war. Of these, 20,000 were engineers. I sometimes wonder if we stop to think of the great contribution these immigrants make in dollars and cents, to say nothing of their brain power. The cost of educating these 20,000 engineers at about $6,000 each would be over $120 million, to say nothing of the cost of raising them until they were ready to enter university. These people come over here ready to go to work and their earning capacity represents well over a quarter of a million dollars each. This is a great economic thrust to our economy.
I should like to speak for a moment about my own profession. There were 6,000 doctors entering Canada since 1945, most of whom came from the British Isles. The cost of training these 6,000 doctors would be approximately $84 million in Canada. This is a gift. I am not including the cost of raising these doctors from infancy until the time they were ready to go to medical school. The earning power of this group would be approximately $3 billion, quite a proportion of which would go to the government in the form of income taxes. It is a fact that since the last war 37 per cent of all the doctors in this country, including our own medical school graduates, came from outside of this country. About 18,000 of the nurses who are today working in the hospitals across Canada were trained in hospitals outside of this country. Think of what it would have cost us to have raised these young people from birth
[Mr. Rynard.l

and then trained them to take their place in the world.
Then, I come to the other professional fields. We find that over 16,000 teachers and professors have come to this country since 1945. We are very short, as I have said, of doctors and nurses at the moment. The Hall commission report stressed the need for doctors and nurses over the next 10 years and the need for five new medical schools, as I pointed out before. The shortage will become more acute because the sources of supply overseas are drying up. It takes something like seven years to train a doctor from the time he starts medical school until he is ready to go to work. No drive has been needed up to this moment in order to attract doctors to this country. As a matter of fact, the government of the day deserves no credit, in many ways, for the people who have come here. We have to change our tactics. Doctors are harder to get. I would suggest to the government that they consider offering some incentives to the medical profession. Certainly, positions should be located. There will be difficulty in getting the doctors. However, the government should hold consultations with the Canadian medical association to ascertain the best way of attracting these doctors when they reach our shores. I am thinking of the first six months or the first year they are here when they have to pass examinations. Perhaps some degree of latitude could be given in these particular fields. These doctors are well trained, most of them in United Kingdom universities. I draw to the attention of the minister the fact that this matter is urgent. We will be unable to turn out sufficient doctors from our own medical schools for the next 10 years.
When I say the need is urgent, Mr. Chairman, all I have to do is to point out to you that there are hospitals across Canada today that are operating without interns. I can go to the metropolitan city of Toronto and indicate hospitals which are running without interns. I can take you to hospitals where there are floors closed because we have not the nursing personnel to run them. This is not good enough. I say to the minister therefore that he should get in touch with the Canadian medical association to see what can be done to bring to this country physicians, nurses and trained personnel.


Mr. Olson:: I do not intend to spend a great deal of time on these estimates today because the two questions I want to raise have been discussed during this session and the last session of parliament. First of all, I was in-

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
terested in the remarks made by the minister concerning the attitude of the Canadian government toward immigrants from Hong Kong. The minister made one or two statements which I believe appeared to indicate a changed attitude toward the immigration problem in Hong Kong.
My conclusion was that the minister pointed out we should look at immigration from Hong Kong in terms of ordinary immigration rather than in terms of a refugee problem. In order to substantiate this position he went on to say that if there were a relaxation of immigration regulations to permit additional people to come from Hong Kong to Canada or any other place in North America, this would initiate another flood of illegal immigrants from the mainland of China into Hong Kong. I think there is some sense to this reasoning. However, Mr. Chairman, we know also that there are still a great number of families in Canada who have relatives, brothers, sons, daughters and so on, in Hong Kong. In some cases the reasons given for the refusal to admit these relatives to Canada are not sufficient to provide the families here with additional information. In other words, there are cases that I have in Medicine Hat, and I am sure every other member in the house has too, in connection with which the immigration department does not provide sufficient information to the people here to satisfy them as to the reasons the immigration department refuses to allow them to enter Canada.
There may be an improvement in the policy, but nevertheless there seems to be an overriding suspicion, because of certain things that have happened during the last two or three years, that some of the people applied for are not members of the family. The department can never get conclusive evidence of birth and all the other vital statistics required for persons who come from mainland China. I do not say the minister should brush aside all these regulations but he should take this factor into account, and give sympathetic consideration to such applications.
The minister claims the government is working very diligently to find ways and means of overcoming these difficulties and reuniting these Chinese families in Canada. We sincerely wish him success.
I now wish to refer to a particular case in my constituency, but I shall not name the individual concerned. I shall send the name to the minister. This man has resided in Canada for 35 years, and although on four occasions a judge has passed his application 20220-433
for citizenship it was turned down by ministerial authority. This man has now made his fifth application and he sincerely and honestly does not know what caused the rejection of his previous ones.
I realize regulations are required for security purposes, but I believe this man should be given at least a suggestion of the reason why he is being rejected so that he could answer it. From talking to his neighbours I am satisfied there must be something in his file that has no foundation. This matter has been going on for 12 years, and neighbours who know him have nothing but praise for the man's conduct.
This man reapplied two or three months ago, and if the present minister rejects his application I hope he will at least provide some inkling of the reason. I would be pleased to discuss this man's application with the minister or his officials. It is not satisfactory to say he has been living here for 35 years and in that time no one has interfered or bothered with him, and therefore his certificate of citizenship is not important. Without it he is prohibited from crossing the border into the United States or travelling to any other country for fear that without citizenship papers he will not get back into Canada, which he has come to regard as his homeland. I hope the minister will give sympathetic consideration to this application or else provide some inkling of why this man has been rejected.


Mr. Wahn:: I hope the estimates of the department will pass quickly, Mr. Chairman, but I do feel I should say a few words with regard to immigration because of the importance of the subject to my riding and Canada as a whole. In St. Paul's riding about one third of the residents are people who have made their homes there after coming from other countries. The great majority of them have become good Canadian citizens, and have made a great contribution to the life of Toronto and to the riding itself. Therefore I have a particular interest in immigration because of the nature of my riding, and also I have a particular interest in it because I have served as a member of the United Church committee on immigration, which is concerned with questions relating to this department.
I was delighted to hear the minister say he proposed to adopt a positive program to welcome immigrants to Canada. This is about the most important decision that any minister of immigration could make. I welcome that statement. I believe immigrants should not

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration be treated as people who are looking for favours when they ask for admission to Canada. They should not be treated as suppliants. They should be welcomed to this country and treated with respect, and that attitude should prevail no matter what the colour of their skin, no matter what their country of origin, no matter what their level of education. I am delighted to know that is the approach which the minister proposes to adopt.
There was one point, however, in the minister's remarks which caused me some concern and which I would ask him to review very carefully with his departmental officials. I refer to the statement on page 13 of the speech notes in which the minister indicated that the Chinese amnesty program might be changed in some way-


An hon. Member:: He said "suspended", "terminated".


Ian Grant Wahn: 
Mr. More:: Mr. Chairman, I just wish to make a few remarks at this time which will hasten the passage of the estimates item by item, because I am not holding up any item. First of all, this is my first opportunity to congratulate the minister on his appointment. Coupled with that I would like to congratulate his parliamentary secretary, because he is a man for whom during the time I have been in the house I have had great personal respect. I have had fine cooperation from the minister personally, and his parliamentary secretary, in the cases I have brought to their attention, although I have not always had satisfactory conclusions. However, I think I can go this far and say that the minister personally exhibits those traits of character and non-prejudice which I think are very important in holding the office that he does.
I think that is about as far as I can go in congratulating him on his effort today. After


reading his speech-which I was very happy to receive, incidentally, and give attention to -which is to be reproduced outside the house, and considering the promises of the Liberal party to the electorate, I agree with the hon. member for Greenwood who said we had only a mouse in the literature in front of us. Why it was felt that this speech contained so much and was important enough to warrant prior release to the press gallery, for the life of me I cannot understand, in view of the election promises that were made and the Liberal planks in this regard which brought them support-for I believe these planks and promises did bring them support.
There is no evidence here of any priority and I do not know why this government places priorities on certain things which seem to have very little importance when one considers the major problems of Canada, and at the same time probably frustrate the minister in his desires to carry out his own personal wishes in amending this legislation. I think the Canadian people deserve an explanation of these things.
I agree generally with the remarks that have been made throughout this debate. I fully agree with the remarks of the hon. member who has just resumed his seat. I am concerned with one announcement in this presentation of the minister to the committee, namely that the amnesty and adjustment program will be terminated on September 1. First of all I would like to suggest to the minister that it is unfair to a large segment of the people, because the immigration offices have not been able to handle the work that has come to them through this program. It is the experience at my local office that the people who seek to make statements have sometimes had to wait two or three weeks before anything is done. Perhaps this has been because an interpreter was needed, but sometimes it has been because the business of the office was so heavy that the officials could not attend to the particular case. That is one reason why I think the announcement that this program will terminate two weeks from now is a terrible one, and I urge the minister to reconsider this matter. I am going to make some suggestions to him in this regard before I conclude my remarks.
The other matter I want to emphasize today-and I know from speaking personally to the minister that he is aware of this situation-is that although they say the program is four years old and this has been ample time for everyone to take advantage of it, this is not in truth the fact. First of all, it

was a year to a year and a half, or maybe two years, before there was any co-operation from the Chinese community in regard to this program. There is a very basic and a very good reason for this. These people are a law unto themselves. Although they render services to the communities in which they live and to all people who can bring them business, in their own personal relationships they are very, very close and there is a very definite authority in the head of a Chinese family.
In many cases the head of the Chinese family is 70 or 75 years old. He is a small fellow who has probably been afraid all his life. He knows what the circumstances are in respect of his status and is afraid of the result of any disclosure on his part. Very often this man has worked all his life, made a success of a small business and has supported a family. What does happen as a result of the police disclosure and action? I am sure we all know the answer to that question.
Very often the head of the family has been frightened by stories told him by the individuals who make money out of these situations. The Chinese fellow is afraid he will lose his position and be sent out of the country. He has often told his own family what to say about their regularization status. False information is given by all the members of his family.
Young Chinese people refer to their fathers as "daddy". Some of these young children have told me that their parents told them to give the false information they have been giving. Many times these people will not give explanations at all. I have one particular situation in mind. A Chinese family has been running a grocery and has found a good living in this occupation from the point of view of their requirements. There is one son in this family who in fact is an illegal entrant. This husband and wife did not have any children of their own. The father before bringing his wife to Canada made three trips to China. When his wife came to Canada they followed an old Chinese custom and brought this boy as their son. He was not in fact a blood son.
I spent a good deal of time with these people over a period of three years. I have known the family for some 20 years. On each occasion I visited them they would say: "You help our son; you help our son". I said: "Pop, I want to help you". On each occasion they would tell me a slightly different story. After the three year period I had decided in my own mind what the discrepancies and untruths were. I finally paid a visit to this
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration family and told the son there was nothing I would rather do than help him obtain a regularized status. I said to him, "You are not telling me the truth. I have come to four or five conclusions about what you have told me. Many things you have said are not true." I then told him what I felt was the truth. The young lad then said, "You are almost right, Mr. More, but what I have told you is what my daddy told me to say". I said to the young lad, "Go downstairs and tell your daddy I want to see him". The little old man came up and started his story in the usual manner. I said: "Look, pop, this has been going on for three years. I have run out of reasons for visiting you. Either you must trust me or say that you do not, in which case we will go no further". I said that I could not accept the story he had told me and knew that it was not the truth. I outlined to the old man what I felt was the true story. He said, "You are pretty near right, Mr. More. I will tell you this." When he had finished his story I felt that I finally had some idea of the truth. I gave him advice about further action. That was a Saturday and on the following Monday he went to the immigration office. Within two months he was regularized. Today he has made an application for his family to come to Canada. I hope his family will be able to come within a short period of time.
Mr. Chairman, the facts I have just related apply to a family of which I have some knowledge. I wonder whether anyone with any influence in other communities has been friendly with people in similar circumstances, helping them to understand and accept the assurances that have been given. These people should be given the understanding that their status can be regularized if they will tell the truth. I have only referred to one case with which I am familiar, and wonder how many more there are in existence. Each year these people are learning to trust their friends and believe in the assurances because of satisfactory treatment other individuals have received. They are beginning to believe that they will not receive discriminatory treatment. There are many hundreds of people who I believe will come forward soon and tell the true facts. I believe they will do so as a result of this program.
The program in question has really only been operating effectively for two years rather than four. Someone has worked very hard over a period of two years in an attempt to break down the fear these unfortunate people have. I refer again to what the hon.
6850	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration member for St. Paul's said and assure the members of this committee that I cannot sit here silently in approval of these estimates.
I cannot do so because of what the minister said in respect of cutting off this program in two weeks. What will happen to the people who cannot be serviced in your offices within that short period of time? They are being denied an opportunity to come forward and establish a regularized status. This opportunity is being arbitrarily removed without warning. The minister today announced that this program would be concluded in two weeks. People who have not taken advantage of the situation will be discriminated against after the conclusion of the program. I cannot understand how the minister has arrived at this decision. I agree there must be a cut-off date. I think the program and educational work have now reached a stage when the people will open their hearts and trust those who wish to help them. I suggest to the minister that he end the program on September 1, 1965. I do not think two weeks warning is enough, or fair. Many of these people will within a short period of time accept this program and take advantage of it, but I am sure all of the people who should take advantage of it will not do so within the next two weeks.
We must remember that these people are very different from the people who come from Europe and other countries. Their family ties and authorities are completely different. They have not been accepted in this country with open arms. Generally they have been able to support themselves and are accepted as individuals who work long and hard hours. People are very pleased to find these little Chinese stores open late at night. These people have been accepted to that extent.
I should like to ask the minister to consider extending this program. I assure him we want to get on with the business of the house and deal with his estimates. This program is tremendously helpful to these people. I hope the minister has listened carefully to all the suggestions that have been made, and the arguments I have put forward in support of an extension of the program. I hope he listened with attention to what the hon. member for St. Paul's said. He may be assured the program is not four years old but in fact only two years old. I think an improvement is coming in respect of these people, as evidenced by the fact they have more confidence in people of their community who assure them of fair treatment. I do


not think the gates should be closed at the end of this month. The program should continue for at least 12 months. That much warning would be much better than the two weeks warning now being considered and I think the least I can ask the minister to do at this time is extend the program. The least I ask of the minister at this time is that he give notice here and now that the doors are open and that the program is available. Give it publicly and make it widely known. I will certainly make it known to the people of my community that the program will be finished by the first of September or the end of September, 1965. Having undertaken a humane program which was brought about as a result of discrimination throughout the history of the Chinese in Canada, please do not eliminate completely the benefit of that program by only two weeks warning that the program is finished.
There is discrimination in the act and nothing can cover it up. I concur fully in the remarks of the hon. member for Greenwood in this regard. It is something of which no Canadian can be proud. As I say, we know that the older Chinese have not assimilated but have carried on their old Chinese ways. On the other hand, their sons and daughters are the equal of any in school and the equal of any of us as citizens of Canada. I ask the minister to consider these points well. I thank him for his co-operation and personal consideration whenever it has been necessary to approach him.


Mr. Fairweather:: Mr. Chairman, I hope that the one or two comments I wish to make today will not be taken out of their context and find their way into a framed picture on the minister's wall. With that caveat I will proceed to make a few comments. First of all I agree with the two members who have taken the strongest possible exception to what I say, with all fairness, is an arbitrary cut-off date for the amnesty program. My hopes and expectations were realized in their remarks.
It is an interesting coincidence to me that within the last day or two I have been discussing this problem with the department and yesterday I arranged by long distance telephone to have a Chinese make disclosure when I am available to go with him some day next week. I agree with the hon. member for Regina City that the program is only started. We have had a few hundred come forward so far, and for the life of me I cannot see what the point is in this shortsighted cut-off date. I hope that before the

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
afternoon is out the minister will show his usual fair sense of proportion and announce as some of us have asked that the period of amnesty will not be arbitrarily cut off in two weeks time. This would spoil a program that is only getting under way.
I suppose we all relate to personal examples, and in the case of the person 1 have in mind it has taken him a couple of years to get to the stage that he feels able to brave the questioning of the department. These people have been unfortunate and the rest of us can take no pride in the situation. They have lived in a somewhat isolated way but now they are coming out of their shells, so to speak, and are willing to make statements. I hope they will be given every opportunity. Everything else in Canada seems to be postponed until 1967 and maybe the minister would find it convenient to postpone this date to the centennial year.
There are two specific questions I want to ask. One or two speakers have referred to the question of male fiances and seemed to think that they were restricted to Hong Kong. I did not take this from the minister's statement and I see he nods his head. I am sure this is to be taken in the widest sense of the word. It is somewhere in the minister's statement but I cannot find it at the moment. I hope I can be reassured on this matter and I trust that those within iron curtain countries will be included. I have a particular example in mind. In many instances the British authorities have facilities in these countries and if we in Canada are not yet ready to establish immigration offices and consular officials there, surely we can usefully avail ourselves to the facilities of our British friends because so many Canadians have been cut off from their family sources since the late 1940's.
I was disappointed that the minister did not make a statement on a matter that has been very close to me as chairman of the immigration committee of the Anglican church. For 14 months I have waited at the minister's door at various times and the doors of other officials with regard to a program that seemed to me to have wide acceptance within the department. I refer to the program under which church people would sponsor 50 boys from Hong Kong to come into this country for training and then to find their places as citizens.
I have been patient about this matter for 14 months. On many occasions during the question period and at other times when I
have wished to press the minister about it he has assured me that he would make a statement on this aspect of immigration. I think it is a rather humanitarian project although I admit that the numbers involved are just a drop in the bucket. However, he assured me that if I would wait until his estimates were presented I would have my answer. I followed his remarks about Hong Kong today with close attention and I should like to have the assurance that the department will accept the proposal of the Anglican Church of Canada and allow these boys to come to Canada under sponsorship to attend technical or other schools within the country. The minister having put me off, if I may use that term, for 14 months, I would be gravely disappointed if, after I and others who are interested in this project have waited so patiently, we were told that this program, which as I say has met with wide acceptance on the part of those officials of the department with whom I have spoken, was not going to be part of the over-all program. I would hope that within the next few minutes the minister would give me a favourable answer in this regard.
I want to say how much I appreciated the remarks of the hon. member for St. Paul's and the hon. member for Greenwood. I think that immigration is not a partisan matter, in the sense that problems concerning immigration and the provisions of the Immigration Act are brought forward by members in all parts of the house. But I must say I agree with the hon. member for Greenwood in his reference to the really splendid statement about amending the act. If I ever heard something written in an office to be uttered through the mouth of the minister, it was this statement. I want to repeat it because I suppose the same thing has been said by every minister whenever he has not wanted to make a move, and I have to admit that people have tried to put such things into my mouth at times. These are his words:
There are many inter-relationships between various sections of the act and isolated amendments, while perhaps appropriate in respect of one or more particular problems, could have unfortunate effects in other areas.
This has been said a thousand times before in the house and it is not good enough. For the life of me I cannot understand this worship at the altar of the sanctity of a statute. If we did our job properly in this place we would have two or three amendments to the act a year, provided they were sensible ones and commended themselves to the majority of members. But, no, the act is some sacred
6852	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration thing on an altar; we all come to bow down and genuflect before the act. I believe that answer is not good enough. If there are amendments suggested by the courts or by members, then for heaven's sake they should be made. Then, in the years to come we could have a consolidation of the act. Then, we could have it revised and revised again to look after all the small problems. This sanctity of the statute is nothing more than nonsense in my opinion.
Having said that, I hope there will be a committee of the house on immigration soon. There is a wide interest amongst the members in such a committee. We would like to hear about the plans the minister has. We commend him for them. The hon. member for Regina City complimented the minister and his parliamentary secretary. I should like to add my compliments. I should like also to compliment the new deputy minister. I see that Maclean's magazine classifies him as a submandarin, whatever that is. He has been a wonderful addition to the department and I thank him for the courtesy he has shown to me. I hope he did not have anything to do with the writing of this nonsensical sentence about the sanctity of the statute, because it is nothing more than nonsense.


Mr. Klein:: Mr. Chairman, the members of my constituency were very pleased with the speech made by the minister in this house on August 4. What they found to be very encouraging was the statement made which appears on page 6394 of Hansard, to this effect:
As far as Immigration is concerned, I have already stated in the house that we have now reached a point where a positive and aggressive policy in immigration matters should be established in our country.
Then on the next page I find this statement:
Later, when the business of the house will permit, I hope to make a revision of the Immigration Act, so that it may be more in keeping with the requirements of the twentieth century and the situation in which find themselves modem states which need more and more to welcome new citizens who are willing to go there.
Perhaps with respect to the question of the twentieth century we might be at the stage in our history at which the United States was in the nineteenth century. Perhaps we ought to borrow some of the aspects of the immigration policy of the United States in the nineteenth century when we are speaking about immigration into Canada in the twentieth century. This speech received unanimous editorial support in the country. I
[Mr. Fairweather.J

should like to refer to an editorial which appeared in the Ottawa Citizen yesterday which stated, amongst other things, the following:
That must be quite an immigration policy that immigration minister Tremblay and his colleagues are hammering out. Mr. Tremblay has been promising a new approach to the whole question of immigration, particularly with respect to regulations governing the entry of newcomers from Asian and Middle East countries, ever since he assumed his present portfolio in January.
Then, it says further:
Just over 93,000 immigrants came to Canada in 1963-a pitiable low figure for a country of Canada's size and natural resources.
Now, I should like to point out to the minister that if you take the train from Montreal and you travel east to the maritime provinces you can travel hundreds of miles without seeing a house. If you take a train from the city of Toronto and you travel west to Winnipeg you also travel hundreds of miles without seeing a house. We must ask ourselves if we are being moral in this country when we have over 3.5 million square miles of territory with only 19 million people in it. I am serious when I say that we must question ourselves also when we condemn the policy of apartheid in South Africa as to whether or not perhaps we are practising a passive form of apartheid in Canada by refusing to admit people to this country. What is the use of condemning South Africa if we will do nothing about the British West Indies?
In the Montreal Gazette of this morning the editorial states:
Immigration has fallen so low that probably almost as many Canadians are leaving the country as are coming in. The curtailment of immigration from its high point of 282,164 in 1957 was at first deliberate Canadian policy, the outcome of the slowdown in the economy. But there has been no slowdown the past few years. And yet the flow of immigration has not recovered.
The hard truth is that people no longer want to come to Canada in the numbers they once did.
In this respect, I should like to say the following: At the end of world war II Canada was the fourth largest manufacturing country in the world. We were sending our products to the different markets in Europe. Now the markets to which we have been sending our products are manufacturing the products we used to send. I say that if we can no longer export the products, let us import the customers. When we speak of landed immigrants in this country, we should change the phraseology. When we speak of the 90,000 immigrants who came to this country as landed immigrants, we should speak of them as landed consumers.

The editorial in the Gazette goes on to say:
It has become clear now that the methods of the Canadian immigration department will have to be revolutionized. This does not mean that the standards set for immigrants will have to be lowered. But it does mean that Canada can no longer wait for prospective immigrants to put in their applications. Canada will have to go out after suitable immigrants.
In this respect there are, as the minister will confirm, thousands of applications waiting to be processed in Greece; thousands of applications waiting to be processed in Italy. We need more staff in these different countries in order to process these applications. May I say that in my constituency there are thousands upon thousands of Greek people who are ready to suffer all kinds of personal deprivation in order to bring their fathers, mothers, sisters and brothers from Greece or from Italy and the different countries in Europe.
Now, Mr. Chairman, recently there have been speeches made in the house with regard to the C.B.C. I am only mentioning this because the cost of the C.B.C. has been criticized. It is criticized because we are televising and broadcasting to too few people in this country. If we had double or treble the population we have we would still only require the kind of broadcasting and televising facilities that we have now.
We have two transcontinental railways in this country, one of which is costing the country millions of dollars every year simply because there are not enough people to make use of these railroads. We are also faced with the situation where we want to implement the recommendations of the Hall royal commission. A headline in yesterday's Gazette said this: "Plan for health package could raise taxes 50 per cent." If we had more people in this country such plans could operate economically.
The trouble is that we have not enough people in this country and with too few people we will never be a great nation. If we want to make this a great nation what we need is people to make it great. If there are people in this country who are concerned -and I am not-about the great colossus to the south, I ask how can we ever be in a position to do anything about that situation unless we are ready to admit people to this country? You cannot live beside a nation of 200 million people, with only 19 million here, and be expected to be able to compete with it in any way, shape or form.
We have every natural resource in this country except one, people. That is the one 20220-434
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration natural resource we lack. So, Mr. Chairman, I hope that the policies yet to be enunciated by the minister will take into account some of the things that have been said here today. Canada should stop thinking in terms of what Canada can do for immigrants but should think in terms of what the immigrants can do for Canada.


Mr. Orlikow:: I suppose I should join with other hon. members who have congratulated the minister on the excellence of his speech, but if I do not, Mr. Chairman, it is not because I have anything specifically against the minister or his speech. It is simply because I have heard other ministers make the same kind of speech. The former minister made a wonderful speech last year. Ministers in earlier governments, both Liberal and Conservative, all made the same kind of speeches. I suppose they came out of the same file, because if one does not do anything to implement the speech that was made the previous year, there is not much point in writing a new speech.
Not for a moment do I believe that the method which the minister announced today, to increase the number of immigrants coming to Canada, will be any more successful than were the methods announced by the former minister. Let us face cold hard facts. The people who have come to Canada ever since those of us who are not Indians started coming here and the type of people we have wanted to encourage, were those who came from northern and western Europe. In recent years those people have virtually stopped coming.
The minister is making a big mistake if he believes that by opening more immigration offices he will attract more people from Great Britain, Norway, Sweden, Holland, Belgium or Germany. The peoples of those countries are pretty intelligent and well informed. That is why we want them here, but that is also why they will not come here. Why should they come from those countries when they have full employment at home, and have had it for the last half dozen or more years, and when they know we have had large scale unemployment for the last 10 years? Even though the unemployment figures are down somewhat, there is no prospect that this coming winter we will not again have somewhere in the neighbourhood of 500,000 unemployed.
Similarly, persons who have families in those countries will look at the kind of medicare plans presently operating in those countries, financed to a large extent if not en-
6854	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration tirely by their governments. If they do this they will not come to Canada because the pension plans they enjoy at present fall far short of the pension schemes we have in Canada, indeed far short of the projected Canada pension plan which is to begin in a year or so but which will take at least 10 years to become fully operative. If we are going to have large scale immigration from Europe it will have to be from the countries of southern Europe.
I do not intend to speak for long about the kind of treatment meted out to people who have come to this country somewhat illegally. On another occasion the hon. member for Royal said this was the kind of person we wanted, the kind of person who has the gumption to jump ship and break the laws. These people have been put in jail for 30, 60 or a hundred days before their trials, at which they have been sentenced to two, three or five months in prison and then deported. Certainly they will not spread any encouragement to people in their home countries to come to Canada.
It is time for the department to take a hard look at the situation behind the iron curtain. Many people who entered Canada since world war II originally came from countries which are now behind the iron curtain. They were displaced during the war. They were in concentration camps or slave labour camps. They were working in factories in France, where they had been transported by the occupying armies of nazi Germany, and after the war they found their way to Canada. I join with members who have already spoken in saying this was a good thing for Canada and that we are happy to have them here.
Many of these people were separated from their families, some from wives, some from children, some from cousins, nephews or nieces. Like many other hon. members I too represent a constituency populated by a large number of people who came to Canada from Europe following world war II, and who have relatives living in countries behind the iron curtain. I know of cases, as I am sure do other hon. members, of people who are already citizens here and who have cousins, nephews, sons-in-law and other relatives in countries such as Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia and Poland. It seems to me we all should practise some of the compassion we are so glad to prate about. I understand the need for security regulations and I am not too critical of them, but it seems to me if we are to encourage the relatives of those people


who are already here to come to Canada we must be more elastic in our interpretation of them than we have been in the past. I hope the minister will take a sympathetic look at this matter. I know he can say with justification that he has been co-operative, as was his predecessor, with regard to individual cases. I have been successful in some of these cases. I know the hon. member for Toronto Greenwood has been successful. My hon. friend from Winnipeg North Centre says he has been successful. I, personally, do not take any credit when I am successful in one of these cases because I think that if a person has to go to his member of parliament in a case of this sort, then, rather than being proud that I have succeeded I feel I ought to be ashamed that the regulations are such as to make it necessary for anyone to take that course. I think the regulations should be such that a person could get permission to enter Canada simply by going to the local office of the department of immigration and making an application. I am not saying we should open the doors wide. I am not saying that if some member of a central committee of the communist party or some minister in the communist government of one of the countries behind the iron curtain wanted to come to Canada we should say: Come on in, we are making it easy. All I am asking is that the tens of thousands of people who are living here and who have relatives who wish to come to Canada should be given a great deal of encouragement.
I should like to say something, now, about what I consider to be the total inadequacy of the change in the regulations which the minister intends to make with respect to this act. I will not repeat the exact words he used. A previous speaker has already done that. When they are read aloud it becomes apparent how ludicrous the concession is. Nor am I satisfied with the minister's promise that he is looking into this question and that we shall soon be getting a complete revision of the act. This is what the former minister of citizenship and immigration said last year. Ministers have been saying it for a long time.
I have before me a memorandum presented to the government of Canada by the Canadian Labour Congress dated March 14, 1962. So it was presented to the former government. This memorandum says, with regard to some changes which were proposed by the minister of citizenship and immigration at that time:
While gratified with what appear to be changes for the better, we are bound to express dis-

appointment that the Immigration Act itself has remained unchanged. There has been widespread agreement, including expressions from your government, that the act should be overhauled, and the congress among others had anticipated an amended act rather than only a change in the regulations. We urge immediate consideration of amendments to an act which has proved obviously unsatisfactory in many respects.
I wonder for how many more sessions and how many more years members on all sides of the house will have to get up and make statements of that kind. I do not believe that this minister or any other minister ever came into the house and told a deliberate lie. What is the sacred cow which prohibits every minister, despite the fact that he sets out with the best of intentions, from bringing about this revision? Every minister has made the same kind of statement: We are getting to it; it won't be long. I do not wish to heap coals of fire, but I hope it will not be as long as it has taken the Liberal party to bring in a pension plan, that is, 35 or 40 years. Surely it is time, now, that the Immigration Act was completely revised along lines which have been indicated so often and so eloquently by spokesmen from all parties in years gone by.
I should like to say something about the discriminatory features which still exist in the act and the regulations. I am constantly amazed at the way in which ministers can make speeches expressing sentiments of equality and justice which are so obviously false. I do not know whether the minister just blinds himself-


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Shame.


David Orlikow: The minister of health says "shame". Let me give a couple of examples. There is not a minister with whom I have had a better or more successful relationship than the present Minister of Justice. On September 23, 1963, that hon. gentleman made a speech to the Chinese community in Vancouver during which he said:
I have been distressed by the accusations of discrimination which have reached me. If prejudice exists in immigration matters it must be eliminated. True Canadianism permits no discrimination. All citizens are equal in rights and responsibilities, regardless of ethnic origin or creed. It is with this view in mind that I am most sincere in my efforts to weed out discrimination and prejudice.
That is a wonderful statement. But today his colleague announces that in two weeks time the amnesty program for the benefit of Chinese who are here illegally will be discontinued. I would point out that this is a program which has only just started to pro-20220-4341
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration duce results. I would remind the minister of health that the only group which will be affected, the group for whom this program was adopted consists of the Chinese, and I suggest that when the former minister of citizenship and immigration made that speech to the Chinese community he must have been speaking with his tongue in his cheek.
During the last session, the hon. member for Greenwood raised the question of a Canadian-born citizen of Chinese origin, Wayson Choy who had applied to be allowed to enter the United States and who was turned down because of his Chinese origin despite the fact that, like most of us in this house, he had been born in Canada. The Prime Minister made the following statement on October 28:
At the outset I should like to make it very clear that as for Canadian law and policy the present government, like its predecessor, is firmly opposed in principle and in practice to racial discrimination.
That sounds very good. But anyone who looks at the Immigration Act and its regulations will readily see how ludicrous statements of this kind are.
I am sorry I do not have my files with me this afternoon-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Stanley Howard Knowles: He does not need them.


David Orlikow: I have to smile at the cheers from those on the benches to my right. Having sat here day in and day out, listening for many hours to the drivel which comes from some of those members I admit I have to smile at their hope that we will co-operate to get on with our business. Suddenly they become great believers in speed and efficiency in this parliament.
The regulations which we have today are designed to a large extent to keep out of Canada those people whose colour is not white. If hon. members opposite do not believe me, if the minister does not believe this is true, I would point out that the people he has to convince are not, those of us who sit on this side of the chamber; he has to convince not only the Chinese of Hong Kong but he has to convince and educate the vast majority of British subjects, citizens of the commonwealth, who live in the West Indies.
As I was going to say before I was so rudely interrupted, in the last year we have had visits to Canada from the prime ministers of some of the West Indian countries. I am speaking from memory, Mr. Chairman, but it seems to me the prime minister of Barbados was here, the prime minister of Trinidad, the
6856	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration prime minister of Tobago, and I think the prime minister of the Windward Islands. All of them mentioned the same fact, that their people find it virtually impossible to come to Canada. The proof is very simple to find, if one wants to look for it, if one wants to be realistic instead of having one's head in the clouds like the Minister of National Health and Welfare.
Just consider the tens of thousands, the hundreds of thousands of people who have gone from Jamaica, from Trinidad and from Barbados to the British Isles; so much so that they have had their difficulties there. But why have they gone to Great Britain rather than Canada? They have done this because the British, very reasonably, have done nothing to keep them out; while we, on the contrary, have done a great deal to keep them out. I and other hon. members who handle immigration cases have had the same experience. There have been many cases of West Indians, people from Jamaica, Trinidad and the other countries of the West Indies who have come to Canada to study, who have spent a year, or two or three years getting the kind of training which every minister has said develops the kind of person we want in this country, they have become skilled in some craft, and yet when they decide to stay in Canada, on the basis of their experience here, having had the kind of training they have had, they have found it virtually impossible to get the minister or the department to permit them to stay. So I say that if the minister wants to make his speeches mean something, if he wants to be honest, he ought to consider what happens to those people from the West Indies and he ought to clean up the mess that still exists.
Mr. Chairman, I now wish to deal briefly with some of the provisions of the Immigration Act. I hoped these provisions would have disappeared by now, as they would have if the minister had followed the speeches made by the former minister and had brought in a revised act, as he should have done. I would like to show just what these provisions do and how ridiculous was the statement made by the Prime Minister during the last session, in the light of the actual practices in Canada. Section 61 of the Immigration Act, in dealing with the regulations provides, by paragraph (g), that the governor in council may make regulations for the prohibiting or limiting of the admission of persons by reason of;
(i)	nationality, citizenship, ethnic group, occupation, class or geographical area of origin,
(ii)	peculiar customs, habits, modes of life or methods of holding property.


It might be interesting to find out some day just what the department considers to be "peculiar customs", because what is one person's peculiar customs may be somebody else's normal customs. Then paragraph (iii) says:
(iii)	unsuitability having regard to the climatic, economic, social, industrial, educational, labour, health or other conditions or requirements existing, temporarily or otherwise, in Canada or in the area or country from or through which such persons come to Canada, or
(iv)	probable inability to become readily assimilated or to assume the duties and responsibilities of Canadian citizenship within a reasonable time after their admission.
The regulations, which are the main means of controlling immigration to Canada, still contain provisions which in effect, if not in language, discriminate on geographic, and hence racial grounds, in precisely the same way as the immigration laws of the United States, which were objected to by the Prime Minister so eloquently during the last session. The main section relating to admission to this country is regulation 31 of the immigration regulations passed on June 18, 1962. The former minister of citizenship and immigration was wont to repeat that these regulations would eliminate discrimination to some extent. We have succeeded in persuading the public of this, but in fact this discrimination still exists. The hon. member for Greenwood pointed out how regulation 36 classifies people. I quote from regulation 31 (d), which says that a person who is a citizen of any country of Europe, including Turkey, or of any country of North, Central or South America or islands adjacent thereto, or of Egypt, Israel or Lebanon is admitted if applied for by relatives in Canada on a fairly wide group of relationships, if such person is able and willing to provide care and maintenance.
I would point out that two very large and important members of the commonwealth, namely India and Pakistan, are among those countries which do not qualify under this regulation; so that citizens of India and Pakistan, as far as this country is concerned, as expressed in this regulation, are in fact second class citizens as compared with the citizens of other commonwealth countries. I am glad I am not one of those who go to commonwealth conferences representing this country, because I for one certainly could not justify this kind of discrimination, whatever the original reasons may have been.
I suggest to the minister that the time has long since passed when the house should be

put off with tinkering with the act and tinkering with the regulations. I know the minister is a new minister, but these matters must be known to the top officials of the department. I have a good deal of confidence in them, despite what some other hon. members, or one member, may think; I have confidence that they must have done a great deal of work along the lines which have already been discussed so often in this house. I suggest that the minister should get busy and correct these matters by a very early date. I suppose it is too late to hope that during this session or during 1964 we will have an amended Immigration Act. I should like to say to the minister that this session will last some time yet. We have a lot of business that must be done, and I am not convinced that he believes an amendment to the Immigration Act is high on the priority list and will be brought forward this year. I do state, however, that if we consider his estimates in 1965 and there has not been a new act brought forward he will have a long, rough, hard, bumpy time before they pass.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to deal with one or two other matters, and will do so briefly at this time. I do not intend to go into detail in referring to the debates that have already taken place during this session in respect of the kind of treatment meted out to people who have come into Canada illegally. The minister made an excellent statement about this matter. The minister has appointed eminent counsel to investigate the situation. I know Mr. Sedgwick is now working on this task and I do not raise this subject as a result of any prejudgment to the effect that Mr. Sedgwick will not present a good report. Surely the department will have to wait until it receives Mr. Sedgwick's report before eliminating some of the horrible practices which in my mind have existed and still exist. The minister can give a detailed explanation to the best of his ability in respect of each case, but in my opinion he cannot in any way justify the fact that a number of people have been kept in prisons for 30, 60, 90 or 100 days before their cases have been settled. The minister cannot in any way justify the fact that a large percentage of those people were brought before magistrates, tried, convicted, sentenced and jailed, although not represented by counsel.
I have said before that I do not believe any person should be tried for an offence for which he can be jailed upon conviction without the benefit of counsel. Certainly no individual in Canada illegally, without friends,
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration contacts and probably no money, should be subjected to that kind of treatment. The department should make arrangements to provide counsel for these individuals. These arrangements would necessitate the spending of a good deal of money, but I feel it would be money well spent. This country would have the kind of reputation for fairness and decency we think we are entitled to as a result of following that suggested practice.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to make one further remark in respect of individuals being kept in jail while their cases are being investigated. I am not at all satisfied with the arrangements made by the department. In Toronto and Montreal these people are being held in Don and Bordeaux jails while their cases are being investigated. I placed a question about this situation on the order paper several weeks ago, and that question has not been answered. My understanding is that these people who are still being held in those jails because they are here illegally, are subject to the same rules and regulations as apply to other inmates.


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. I must interrupt the hon. gentleman. His time has expired.


David Orlikow: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether I may be allowed to speak for one minute to complete my remarks in respect of this subject?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


David Orlikow: I feel that the department is responsible for these people being kept in these jails. The department made the arrangements to do this. I am told that visitors of the people being held in the Bordeaux jail can only visit once or twice each week, that mail privileges are very restricted and that visitors are being fingerprinted. Surely Mr. Chairman, if a large number of people are to be held, pending investigation of their cases, the department should make arrangements to keep these people at some place other than the local jail.


René Tremblay: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to limit the debate on immigration. It is the duty of each member who desires to comment on immigration estimates following my statement, to do so. However, before commenting on the remarks made by hon. gentlemen I should like to make a statement about Indian affairs.


Lucien Lamoureux: Is it the wish of the committee at this stage to hear the minister's statement on Indian affairs? There may be
6858	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration other members who wish to speak on immigration matters. Is it agreed that the minister make a statement at this time?


René Tremblay: I do not wish to limit the debate.


Mr. Dinsdale:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to speak very briefly about immigration matters. Perhaps if I am allowed three minutes I can assist in facilitating the conclusion of the discussion on immigration. Certainly we have no intention of extending the discussion this afternoon, and we felt that there was ample time to discuss the estimates of this department when we were considering interim supply. Because of that fact, it is our hope we will be able to conclude our consideration of the estimates of this department this afternoon.
Several individuals, including the minister, have referred to a new age and spirit about to emerge in regard to Canada's attitude towards immigration. That was the theme of the minister's statement. He referred to the developments that are to take place in the future. The hon. member who just spoke referred to the necessity for a new approach to immigration, and I should like to point out to him and other hon. members that a change in regulations was made in 1962 which provided a new approach to immigration matters. All that is needed to achieve a broader perspective is the application of a more enlightened spirit and policy in the administrative approach.
The main problem that did exist under the old discriminatory approach to immigration was the limiting of unsponsored categories to rather exclusive groups. When the new regulations are applied, in the spirit in which they should be applied, there will be absolutely no limitation to unsponsored immigrants. Immigrants may come to Canada from any place in the world, provided they have the educational background and skills to make it possible for them to fit into Canada's economy.


John George Diefenbaker: Are you referring to the changes made in 1962?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I was referring to the changes brought forward by the former government in 1962 and approved by this parliament.
The refugee category was also broadened at that time. This category was restricted to refugees from Europe until 1962, at which time it was changed, making it possible to meet special emergency circumstances. The refugee provisions now apply to any group
[The Chairman.]

anywhere in the world. I think we have demonstrated a means of meeting some of the problems that have been referred to by various members during this discussion this afternoon. These problems can be solved by broadening our approach to the problem. The minister has indicated that new administrative techniques are going to be applied. Certainly the regulations that were passed in 1962 depend upon the broadening of the administrative facilities and there are two questions I should like to ask in regard to office facilities. I refer first to the West Indies. Up until a few years ago there was no permanent headquarters in the West Indies and immigration was taken care of by a mobile immigration team. I think this gave rise to the problems that were outlined by the hon. member for Winnipeg North. Certainly here is a country where many people are interested in coming to Canada. The regulations now make it possible for them to come to Canada if the administrative means are provided in order to make it possible.
I should also like to ask the minister about the administrative facilities available in Greece where there seems to have been some sort of bottleneck in the past. I feel that the regulations of 1962 are adequate to meet most, if not all, of the problems that have been raised in the discussion this afternoon.


Mr. Gray:: Mr. Chairman, I propose to take only a few minutes of the time of the committee to make some comments about the operations of the department with respect to immigration. I might say in passing that I was interested to note the words of one of the members of the opposition with regard to the deputy minister being referred to in a Canadian magazine as a member of the mandarin class. This may be an omen of hope to those in the house who are interested in increasing Chinese immigration. I do not really know, but I know that we wish him well in his attempt to carry out some positive changes in the department.
In any event, Mr. Chairman, I was pleased to note the positive steps that were mentioned in the minister's statement, particularly those dealing with increasing the staffs in overseas offices, putting them in proper quarters, and general changes and improvements in administrative practices. However, I say, I hope in a constructive spirit and with the utmost respect, that statements and speeches favouring a positive approach to immigration and even the broadening of the regulations themselves will not mean too much unless there are at the same time the staff and the administrative

machinery needed to handle the admission of sizeable numbers of immigrants in a prompt and courteous manner, and even more important is the need for an attitude in the department from top to bottom that this department is a department of immigration and that immigrants are needed and useful to this country.
The lack of effect of changes in the regulations unless backed up by proper administrative machinery and proper attitudes is shown by the record of the previous Conservative government. I was interested to hear the comments of the hon. member for Brandon-Souris on this point. In the years between 1945 and 1957 I must say that under the regulations which then existed and which have been criticized by the hon. member for Brandon-Souris and other members, over
1.600.000	immigrants came to Canada, all of them under a Liberal administration, and the overwhelming majority of them became good, useful and productive citizens. In 1956 the last full year of Liberal government 164,857 people came to this country and in 1957 the number rose to 282,164. In 1958, the first full year of Conservative government, the number dropped to 124,851 and it dropped each year thereafter until in 1961 it fell to a shameful low of 71,684. I might say that if the excuse is given that economic conditions had deteriorated at that time I think members of the opposition are caught in a difficult dilemma because I had understood their comments in this house to be that in those years there were no economic difficulties, and in fact in 1961 improvement had begun.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Herbert Eser (Herb) Gray: I will accept questions at the end of my remarks, which will not be too prolonged if the hon. member does not mind. In January, 1962 the new regulations referred to by the hon. member for Brandon-Souris were proclaimed. What happened then? Was there a dramatic increase in immigration? No. The number increased by less than
3.000	to 74,586. Therefore the changed regulations apparently meant very little under the previous administration since there appeared to be a failure to fill staff vacancies and perhaps there was even an actual decrease in staff. I think it can be said that the attitude of the previous government was exemplified by the minister of that time, Mrs. Fairclough, who on behalf of the government was responsible for a very unfortunate order in council limiting Italian immigration. In any
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration event, since the present administration took office there at least has been a start toward improvement, with immigration rising in 1963 to some 93,000.
But, Mr. Chairman, this is only a start toward improvement. There is a lot more that can and must be done, and much of it need not wait for changes in legislation because the vast powers given to the minister and the government under the present act to deal with these matters through order in council, thereby changing the regulations, are such that changes can have a far reaching effect if put into effect in this way. These changes in departmental organization and administrative practice can have a far reaching and useful effect.
I might say to those who are particularly interested, as I am, in having changes made in the legislation, which can only be done through being introduced in the house, that if members of the official opposition would be kind enough to permit the resolution and amendments now pending before the house to come to a vote it would be a lot easier to have other needed legislation, including changes in the Immigration Act, brought before us for implementation, and it could be done a lot quicker.
I noted the minister's reference in his statement to the link between the number of immigrants to be admitted and the administrative apparatus of the department. But, Mr. Chairman, our aim should not be to hold back the number of immigrants to fit the administrative apparatus of the department. Instead our aim should be to expand the administrative apparatus of the department to meet the needs of this country for an expanded population through immigration.
It is important to look for people abroad with high degrees of skill and training, but there is still room in this country for people who bring with them not much more than basic intelligence, good health and the desire to make a contribution to our country's life. If we expect suddenly to get very large numbers of immigrants from Europe, for example, with very high degrees of skill, education and training, I think that to a certain extent we are fooling ourselves. It is true, however, that through better promotion and more staff abroad we can get more immigrants of this type. With the dramatically improved economic conditions in western Europe and the opportunities there the high proportion of skilled people who might have wanted to
6860	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration come here 10 years ago is no longer available.
I hope that this emphasis on skill and training will not be used by the department officials as a subtle way to keep people out. It is true that we must try to match the flow and type of immigration to the type of skills needed, the type of jobs available and the economic conditions of the country, but we are not going to have tens of thousands of Ph.D.'s in atomic physics, or computer technicians battering at our doors to get into Canada. If we want to expand the population of the country more quickly than natural increase will permit and in some way to balance the outflow to other countries, we are going to have to make it possible for substantial numbers of people to come here who have relatively low degrees of formal skills and training when they arrive.
There is no question but that an expanded population increases jobs for all and helps the economy to grow. One basic answer to our economic problems is a larger population. This is shown by the fact that the United States, with the same type of geographic divisions and difficulties, has a population of some 190 million providing a huge internal market so that that country is not exposed in the same way as our own to external economic changes.
Just by way of conclusion, Mr. Chairman, let me suggest that my own community of Windsor is a wonderful example of how people coming from almost every part of the world, the British Isles, western Europe, central and eastern Europe, the Mediterranean countries and the Orient, can work and live together in harmony and make a great and positive contribution to this country.
There is still a lot more to be done toward making the law more just and equitable, toward making more effective and generally improving both the act and the regulations as well as the operations of the department itself. I say by way of conclusion that the record of the previous Liberal government between 1945 and 1957 in bringing almost two million immigrants to this country, while at the same time giving us an expanding economy with expanding employment opportunities for all, is an indication of the achievement that can come, and I am confident will come, in the very near future.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: May I be allowed just a brief question of the hon. member? I wonder if he is aware that one of the major reasons for changing the regulations in 1962 was that


the traditional source of immigrants was drying up in Europe as a result of the economic boom, and instead of sending people abroad, countries such as Germany and France were inviting immigrants to meet their employment needs? This was the reason for broadening on such an extensive basis the categories of immigrants. Is he aware also, as the minister outlined today, that as the result of the regulation changes there was a dramatic upsurge in immigrants coming in from Hong Kong, for example, in 1962 and 1963?
Then, there is the joint provincial responsibility in immigration matters. I am sure he is aware of the dynamic immigration program that was sponsored by the Ontario government in the immediate post-war years, which was one of the most successful immigration schemes.


Herbert Eser (Herb) Gray: If I may reply briefly to my hon. friend's very interesting question, I should like to direct his attention to an interesting editorial in the Globe and Mail for June 10, 1964, entitled "A Tale of Two Countries". This editorial points out that at a time when our immigration was decreasing in a drastic manner, some one million immigrants from Italy, Greece, Portugal and Spain went to West Germany and 100,000 more are expected to go there this year. As the editorial points out so well:
In these figures and facts there are two morals for Canada. One is that a lively, competitive economy can absorb almost any amount of immigration.
Then, I quote from the editorial again:
The other moral Canada may draw from the West German story is that there is still a substantial pool of ambitious manpower and woman-power in southern Europe. If West Germany can get large numbers of these people to settle there temporarily, cannot we get large numbers of them to settle here permanently?
I have, in my reply, only to echo these statements and point out that if last year we only got 14,427 people from Italy and 4,759 from Greece it shows that even under the regulations to which my hon. friend refers, there is still a lot more that Canada could and should do in this regard.
t Translation]


René Tremblay: As regards Indian affairs, I would like to reiterate that my aim with regard to Indians is to help them participate fully in the social and economic life of this country. We are pursuing this aim through a wide range of programs aimed at the development of the individual and the development of the community. Throughout the em-

phasis is on the progressive involvement of the Indians in both planning and execution. Again, we are seeking to bring about the further extension to Indians of services normally available to other citizens. This will involve continuing consultation not only with the provinces and with other federal departments but with the Indians themselves for we know the importance of obtaining their views on matters which are of direct concern to them.
I want to review in some detail the current Indian affairs programs. However, before doing so, I would like to speak of three or four matters which also deserve attention and which are occupying much of my thought and energy at this time.
Hon. members will recall that the administration of Indian affairs was considered at the federal-provincial conference held in November, 1963. It was agreed by the delegates that the matter was so complex as to warrant a federal-provincial ministerial conference and plans are proceeding toward this end.
In the months that have intervened since November we have been developing various proposals aimed at encouraging greater provincial interest and co-operation in Indian affairs always with the basic objective of providing Indians with the same opportunities for social and economic advancement as are enjoyed by other citizens. We know that the provinces have also used the intervening period to good advantage in considering what part they might play in furthering the basic objectives agreed upon at the November conference.
We intend to keep the Indians fully informed with regard to the further extension of provincial services to them. I have already written to the council of each band explaining the exploratory purpose of the November conference and will keep them up to date as developments occur.
In keeping with our wish to consult the Indians on all matters of direct concern to them, the Indian claims Bill No. C-130, as introduced in the house on December 14 last, was sent in January to Indian bands, Indian organizations and others throughout the country. I am glad to say we have been having a generally good response to this with nearly 250 bands already heard from. Some 31 replies have been received from other sources. Close study will be given to the various suggestions made before proceeding with the legislation.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
It would also be my hope that we can begin to move ahead over the next year with appropriate amendments to the Indian Act. Much of the ground work has been done already. On the other hand, it is not something we want to rush through without a great deal of careful thought. What is more, our legislative thinking must be reshaped to some extent by current and possibly quite new developments in the Indian affairs field, not the least of which are the promotion of closer co-operation with the provinces, and the community development approach of which I will be speaking later.
I have mentioned Indian consultation in connection with the possible further extension of normal federal and provincial services to Indians and in regard to the Indian claims bill. I would also confirm here what has been said before about the Indian Act, namely that this government would consult with the Indians on any proposed changes. Consultation is not, of course, an easy task when there are over 550 bands and a dozen or more Indian organizations. Much thought is being given to ways and means of providing for more ready access to Indian opinion at all levels-band, regional and national. I am confident we shall be able to work something out in this respect that will be satisfactory to the Indians and the government alike.
As well as through direct consultation with the Indians we hope to learn much from the Indian research project which was announced in the house on December 2 last and which is now in the field study stage. The research director, Dr. H. B. Hawthorn, has informed me that he and Dr. Adelard Tremblay, associate director, have been successful in gathering a very capable group to work on the project. As stated in December the purpose of the project is to provide a body of knowledge that will assist in establishing guidelines for future policy and the over-all planning required to promote the welfare and progress of Canadian Indians. I am sure that much valuable information will soon begin to flow from the study which is unique in Canadian experience.
Before going on to review the Indian affairs programs, I would like to mention that although I am greatly interested in the wellbeing of the Indians, matters relating directly to Indian health come within the jurisdiction of the Department of National Health and Welfare. I am of course, willing to take up with my colleague questions which may arise concerning Indian health. However, I would point out that hon. members will be given
6862	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration an opportunity to raise whatever questions they may have in this field when the estimates of that department are being discussed.
Basic to the work of the Indian affairs branch is the education program. The estimates for 1964-65 reflect the continued emphasis on the program with 57.55 per cent of the amount requested designated for Indian education, including $27,200,000 for the administration, operation and maintenance of the school program, and $7,416,000 for capital expenditures. This represents an anticipated increased cost for education of $3,528,190 or 11.3 per cent over the previous year. Of this amount about 3 per cent is attributable to a higher enrolment in schools of all kinds, 2.8 per cent to rising costs including higher payments to provincial school boards, 1.7 per cent to an accelerated program of building repairs to maintain minimum standards of school accommodation, and 3.8 per cent for new construction.
School enrolment continues to increase at a steady pace with the school population for the 1963-64 academic year standing at 55,475 or an increase of approximately 5,000 over the previous year. The largest part of this increase was due to the admission of approximately 4,200 more pupils in provincial schools.
To facilitate the further enrolment of Indian pupils in the provincial school systems, provision has been made in the proposed capital expenditures for contributions towards provincial school facilities of approximately $2,345,000 as compared to expenditures for this purpose during 1963-64 of approximately $1,913,000. Payments to provincial schools for tuition fees for Indian pupils have also continued to increase proportionately, and expenditures of approximately $4,255,000 are anticipated, an increase of $465,000 over last year.
Our government has continued to provide financial assistance to worthy Indian students to enable them to follow academic, professional or vocational courses so long as the students display reasonable promise and industry. During the year 22 special scholarships were awarded to outstanding students for studies in engineering, nursing, medicine, teacher training, metallurgy, auto mechanics, diesel mechanics, carpentry, music and commercial art. In addition financial assistance according to need was given to over
4,000	pupils to enable them to attend high school or university, or to obtain professional training.


I am endeavouring to develop a basis for the establishment of school boards on reserves which would assume responsibility for the operation of reserve schools in accordance with provincial legislation and under the direction of provincial education administration. It is hoped that in the near future pilot projects of this nature will be conducted in selected areas.
The number of Indian students attending schools providing trades and professional training more than doubled during the past year. To accelerate the increase even more, it is intended to give added emphasis to this field of education in the coming year. In addition to the regular trade schools, the Indian affairs branch conducts special courses to provide vocational training in such activities as guiding and boat building.
The growing importance of economic development programs to many Indians in all walks of life is reflected in the estimates. These are essentially self-help programs and wherever possible financial assistance from appropriation is furnished on a repayable basis. Last year a total of $163,000 was repaid, most of which was for materials and supplies used in wildlife and fishery projects and for advances for agricultural, handicraft and employment placement purposes.
Expenditures from appropriation are augmented by loans from a revolving loan fund and by expenditures, grants, or loans from band trust funds. The revolving loan fund of $1,000,000, established as a source of credit for Indians who do not have access to ordinary lending institutions, is operating with about $750,000 out on loan at any time, leaving about one fourth of the fund available for new loans.
The use of band trust funds for economic development purposes is also increasing. Last year some $300,000 in band funds was diverted from direct relief to more constructive purposes including the improvement of reserve facilities. Seventy three projects were accepted by the Department of Labour for the winter works incentive program with an estimated 1,297 Indians employed for a total of over 20,000 man days. Payroll costs were $228,000 half of which is of course recoverable under the program.
Bands lacking sufficient funds to participate in the winter works incentive program are assisted under a special community employment program undertaken each year by the department. In the past year $1,200,000 was approved for this purpose. An additional sum of $414,000 was made available under the

federal supplementary government winter construction program to carry out works projects on reserves in 16 designated development areas.
Indians are encouraged to exploit and develop the natural assets of their reserves and the provision is made in the estimates for materials, supplies and equipment to help them in this. Programs of assistance to farmers and ranchers are being continued with the emphasis on livestock raising for which a promising rotating herd program has been established. The forest resources of Indian reserves are another important factor in their economy and harvesting by the Indians themselves has increased to 90 per cent as compared to 25 per cent 15 years ago. Oil and gas are providing Indian bands, mostly in Alberta, with an annual revenue of over $2 million.
There is a potential for industrial enterprise on many reserves that has been scarcely tapped. However, while development of this kind has so far been limited, this is an area where we hope that more can be done. To this end we have established a close working relationship with the Department of Industry and hope to take full advantage of their services. We will also need to considerably strengthen branch staff in this field.
The estimates reflect an expanded scale of activities to meet the demand for Indian handicrafts. More raw materials are being provided on a repayable basis while the need for broader distribution is being met through expansion of the department's central marketing facilities. My department recognizes that still greater attention needs to be given to this field and with this aim has recently taken on an arts and crafts development officer. This man will be examining the development of Indian handicraft to see in what way it can be further stimulated.
Development projects have been undertaken for the benefit of the very large group of Indians who still pursue their traditional vocations of hunting, fishing, trapping and wild crop harvesting. Since these projects are based on provincially-owned resources their success is dependent largely on continuation of the excellent co-operation now in effect either by formal cost-sharing agreements or informal work-sharing arrangements with the provinces concerned.
Assistance in commercial fishing is provided by supplying gear and in some cases freezing and storage facilities. Trappers are assisted by provision of grub stakes, essential supplies and equipment. In relation to both
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration fishing and trapping, marketing assistance is provided where necessary.
Indians seeking wage employment are assisted through the department's employment placement program. Growing numbers of selected candidates are being placed in permanent employment in urban centres with the co-operation of the special services division of the national employment service. The total of such permanent placements in five years of operation has reached 2,124 of which 507 were placed in 1963-64. The majority of these were qualified for their jobs through academic and vocational training provided by the department.
Rural and seasonal placements, again with assistance from the national employment service, have on the basis of known figures reached a total of 26,854, including nearly 9,109 placed during the past year. These figures do not include the many Indians who have obtained employment on their own initiative.
Provision is again being made for a road construction program aimed at developing road systems on the more populated reserves and providing access to Indian groups who are living in isolation. Although progress has been made over the past several years in this field much remains to be done. This is particularly the case in providing access to reserves whose residents, as yet, have no adequate means of reaching centres of population where they can take advantage of employment opportunities, school facilities and so on. In some instances provincial governments have participated in the construction and maintenance of roads on reserves. It is hoped that further discussions with the provinces will result in better road facilities being made available to the Indians.
Sanitation continues to be an urgent problem in many areas and a substantial increase in the allotment for this type of work will be noted. The provision of wells, and water and sewage systems where feasible, is being given priority by the department's technical staff. Efforts are also being made to encourage band leaders to take the lead in the development of better sanitation facilities.
In view of the pressing need for more adequate housing, an increase of some $600,000 has been requested in the housing appropriation for this year. This, together with contributions from the Indians themselves should help to meet some of the more urgent requirements. However, it is foreseen that much more will have to be done in future to keep pace with the steady increase in
6864	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration population and to reduce the existing backlog.
Concern has been expressed about the apparent disparities between the amount of public assistance provided to Indians as compared to that received by other residents of the various provinces. On the surface there appear to be such disparities. However, they are more apparent than real. Indian assistance rates cover food only. Fuel, shelter, clothing and other forms of assistance are provided to Indians as extra items on the basis of need. On the other hand, provincial scales, though varying greatly from province to province, generally include a lump sum payment for food, shelter, clothing, fuel and other needs.
The problem in public assistance is not, therefore, one of amounts of assistance but rather that Indians receive assistance within one framework of administration while other citizens receive it within another. This tends to set Indians apart in a way which I think we all recognize as undesirable. So far the one exception is in Ontario where a number of bands participate under the provincial general welfare assistance act in the same way as other communities. It is the hope of the federal government that similar arrangements can eventually be made throughout the country.
Again, while arrangements have been made in some of the provinces for the extension of provincial and other child welfare services to Indians on reserves, I recognize the need for extending such services to all reserves as quickly as possible.
Despite the progress that is being made under existing programs it is recognized that additional positive measures of a preventive and remedial nature are needed to accelerate the process of bridging the social and economic gaps which are still all too common between Indians and non-Indians in this country. For some time this government has been giving close study to this problem and, as I announced in the house on July 7, has now developed a community development program to complement existing services in the fields of welfare, education, health and economic development and to assist in raising living standards and improving the economic, social and cultural life of the Indians.
This community development program will emphasize Indian participation and initiative in advancing the well-being of Indian communities and will result in the application of a community development approach in many


of the existing projects and services being provided by the Indian affairs branch.
As you were informed, it is expected that over the next three years this will involve an investment of over $3,500,000. The cost of this program is not included in these estimates but will be presented in supplementaries, at which time I will be prepared to answer any questions which hon. members may have.
This government is prepared to take the initiative in introducing a community development program on any Indian reserve which would benefit from this approach. Federal community development work would be phased into provincial operations whenever the Indians concerned are ready for this change and the province is able to extend itp own services. There will be no duplication of provincial services.
Although the community development program will affect in some ways the whole Indian affairs organization, a new social programs division is being created to reflect a new federal emphasis on the need to promote actively the development of Indian communities.
This new division will pull together and focus more effectively a number of services which have been provided in the past in a fragmentary way. This includes the current work being done in Indian leadership training and recreational services on Indian reserves.
The new social programs division will also include a "cultural affairs section" which will be staffed with Indians. This section will recognize the cultural needs of Indian communities and will facilitate the development of various forms of Indian cultural expression in the arts, including painting, sculpture, music, dancing and so on. Similar work will be done in the field of sports. Equal emphasis of course is being placed on the economic and social needs of Indian communities.
It will be necessary to appoint a number of community development officers to co-ordinate new and existing programs in the complex and demanding task of facilitating the development of Indian communities and giving them access to a wide range of technical and other resources which are available at the local, provincial and federal levels. Skilled practitioners in community development are extremely scarce in Canada, however. The federal government plans therefore to arrange additional training for appointees to equip them better for this work.

Training for community development officers constitutes only one aspect of the training that will be carried out. To accommodate the community development approach properly, Indian affairs branch will also be retraining its existing field staff.
Training courses are also being organized for Indians to fill jobs in the community development program. The aim is to create a group of trained and competent Indian employees as soon as possible to assist in the work of community development and eventually to fill positions of responsibility in Indian communities. In effect, Indian communities will be assisted to develop their own municipal type of civil service to manage welfare, recreational services, economic projects and many other local services.
Grants to Indian councils, particularly in communities in which such councils have achieved a measure of effectiveness will be an important instrument of development. Such assistance will supplement band revenues and is intended to make it possible for Indian councils to employ Indians full time in various community services.
The present adult education measures will be stepped up in the context of the community development program. Depending on the needs of various Indian communities, courses will be provided in such matters as budgeting, homemaking, food handling, sanitation and so on.
Within the framework of this program, there will be continuous consultation with Indian groups and individuals. Much of this consultation will take place informally and consideration is being given as well to a more formal structure of Indian advisory committees. These committees will be chosen by the Indian people and will be as broadly representative as possible.
In education, the influx of Indian pupils into provincial schools and training institutes has created a wide-spread need for adequate guidance services particularly for those students who are boarding in cities. Many students need much guidance and encouragement to make the necessary social adjustments to city life and city school study habits. The teacher-counsellor service provided by the branch must be strengthened each year to handle this problem. Indian age grade levels have been brought closer to provincial norms in recent years, but by reason of absenteeism and late starting there is still a relatively large number of children two or more years behind in their grades and who
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration will leave school before completing at least grade VIII. More remedial and accelerated classes are being organized to overcome this difficulty. Pupils leaving school before completing high school or a vocational training course constitutes a real problem. Drop-outs on the reserve are such as to seriously affect economic and social development. More upgrading classes are required to assist this group in raising their academic standing, thereby permitting them to find employment or to take further training if they wish.
It will be apparent from what I have said that there is a real need to move forward in all program areas. To be truly effective this will demand additional effort and attention. The present staff can only do so much. There is a need to strengthen-


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I wonder whether the
minister would permit a question? He is dealing with education. Is it the intention of the department to close the schools on the Indian reserves and have the Indian children attend public schools in the provinces, along with the other children who are attending?


René Tremblay: The hon. member means the integration of Indian students. Yes, that has been the policy in the past and it is the present policy of the government. But, as hon. members know, we must reach agreement with each province, and each province must accept that these students shall go to the public schools.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I have one other question, Mr. Chairman. What has been the reaction of the Indian councils in this regard? I am thinking particularly of the Blackfoot reservation in Gleichen, and the Morley reservation, both of which are Indian reservations in the province of Alberta.


René Tremblay: I met the chief and a few members of this band a few months ago. They are very much in favour of this system if these schools can give to their students exactly the same services that they are anxious to get from any other type of school.

Mr. Chairman, I have only one paragraph to add before I am through.
It will be apparent from what I have said that there is a real need to move forward in all program areas. To be truly effective this will demand additional effort and attention. The present staff can only do so much. There is a need to strengthen the operations
5866	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
of the branch in both the field and support services. More highly qualified staff are required to do the job.
Every Canadian has a responsibility if only to extend the hand of friendship when the moment comes. There are in this country many groups of public-spirited citizens who are conducting their own programs of aid to Indians in city, town and country. Their contribution is invaluable. I appreciate as well all the suggestions we have received from hon. members and other interested persons, groups or agencies during the past year We will always be receptive to any suggestions which might be of benefit to the Indian people.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I wonder whether the minister would answer one more question, Mr. Chairman-just one. This question has reference to Indian affairs. I certainly do not want to delay the passage of the estimates, but this question is causing some concern among the Indian residents, particularly in the province of Alberta. Is it the intention of the department to close the hospitals situated on the reservations, or hospitals that have been set up particularly in reference to medicare for the Indians? What is the reaction of the department to this matter at the present time?


René Tremblay: The department has no responsibility with regard to hospital services; these are the responsibility of the Department of National Health and Welfare. It is that department's responsibility to decide which services shall be given to the Indians, as is the case with any other group of people.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I wonder whether the minister would go one step further. Is it not a fact that the hospitals situated on Indian reservations were under the jurisdiction of his department and financed from the estimates of his department? I may be wrong in this respect.


René Tremblay: As I said, Mr. Chairman, this is the responsibility of the Department of National Health and Welfare.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Are they financed by the Department of National Health and Welfare, or the department of Indian affairs?


René Tremblay: We pay the services of those hospitals.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: That is the point. Then,
have you not some responsibility in reference to these hospitals?


René Tremblay: No. We pay for the services of these hospitals, like any other hospitals provincial or municipal. There is a system whereby we decide how much to pay to any such institution.


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether before five o'clock the minister has any statement to make in regard to the amnesty program. The story is in the newspapers, on the front page, and I am sure it is going to create consternation. I wonder whether, if the minister has any statement to make in this regard, it could be publicized over the week end, if there has been any change in thought in this connection.


René Tremblay: I would like to say, Mr. Chairman, that we decided to choose this date, September 1, knowing that all the Chinese people who will want to benefit from this program will have sufficient time to make their statements. But we will be quite ready, if we are wrong in this assumption, to extend this period. If there are applicants who want to make a statement after September 1, we will be quite happy to extend the period.


David Vaughan Pugh: Mr. Chairman, I have one short question on schooling. Has the Indian population the equivalent of a night school? Most schools in British Columbia run night classes for parents and those who have left school but wish to further their studies. Does the department provide similar facilities for Indian parents who may wish to attend these classes? Also, if there are schools on the reserves, may Indian parents attend them?


René Tremblay: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we have facilities for adult education in many places in Canada. I cannot give the hon. member the exact list of the reserves, but we have facilities for those parents who wish to take courses. I will provide the hon. member with this list as soon as possible.


David Vaughan Pugh: Are these facilities acceptable to them? Do many Indians attend?


Mr. Drouin:: Could the hon. gentleman tell us whether the medical and hospital costs he referred to a moment ago also include doctor's fees? Does the department pay the doctor in addition to the hospital costs?


René Tremblay: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we pay both hospital and medical costs within the hospital.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Citizenship-
5. Administration, operation and maintenance including grants and contributions for language instruction and citizenship promotion, $1,715,000.
Mr. Barneit:: Mr. Chairman, I have one question I would like to ask on vote No. 5, which is the citizenship section of the estimates. We had some discussion earlier on the question of Indian friendship centres. I am trying to identify the particular item in the estimates which covers this matter. I am wondering whether I am correct in assuming that this comes under the item of grants for citizenship promotion. I notice there is some increase in this item in the current estimates, over last year. It does seem to me that this is not a very large amount to be assigned under the rather imposing title of grants for citizenship promotion in this country. I realize that the item above that, which has to do with the provision of language instruction for immigrants, is considerably larger.
I am wondering, with the idea of the Indian friendship centres apparently catching on in various places across the country, just what proportion of this $75,000 it is expected will be devoted in the current fiscal year to that end, and what proportion of the $75,000 is to be used in other forms of citizenship promotion. I think the department is doing something about citizenship promotion with regard to people who are getting their citizenship papers, and I am wondering whether that field of endeavour is also to be covered by this $75,000 vote. It seems to me that if this is the case it is not going to allow very much for any possible development, expansion or assistance in a real way for the friendship centres. Could the minister give us some details as to just what is covered by this $75,000 item?


René Tremblay: I do not have a breakdown of the amount for friendship centres, Mr. Chairman. It is part of the total amount of this item. I will provide the hon. member with this information as soon as possible.


Lucien Lamoureux: Shall the resolution carry?


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, the minister has indicated that he will provide information on this matter when we resume our consideration of these estimates. I think we should leave this until the time we resume our consideration.


Mr. MacNaught:: Mr. Chairman, I believe it is the feeling of all hon. members that if you do not look at the clock for a few
Weights and Measures Act moments we will be able to dispose of this item.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, may I suggest with all deference to the acting house leader that while we have listened to some rather interesting speeches from the various members of the committee, we have not really started our consideration of the estimates. For example, we have not touched upon the question of the operation of the Indian affairs branch, which I think will require a great deal of consideration. I do not see how we could possibly approach the completion of our consideration.


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether the hon. member who has just taken his seat feels that if by unanimous consent we suspend private members' hour we could complete our consideration of this item.


Lucien Lamoureux: I suggest the resolution be reported and that any suggestion of that kind can be considered later.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Resolution adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: Mr. Speaker, may I suggest that by unanimous consent we suspend the private members' hour?


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Apparently it is not unanimously agreed by the house to forgo the private members' hour.
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 public bills and private bills.	'



WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ACT

David Orlikow: the second reading of Bill No. C-47, to amend the Weights and Measures Act (truth in packaging).
He said: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to ensure that retail purchasers of goods packaged in a wrapper or container be fully informed of the weight or measure of the contents. I take no personal pride in this bill and admit that it has been explained in great detail by people who are much more competent to do so than I am.
The national president of the consumers' association of Canada, Mrs. Plumptre, was described by the Minister of National Health

Weights and Measures Act they commented on this bill which I am proposing. I just want to read a couple of paragraphs:
Two cartons of honey look just the same, but one holds 16 ounces and the other 12. Bottles of vinegar come at 8, 12, 16J, 24 and 33 ounces. Soap flakes of varying brands are in packages of 14 ounces, 16] ounces, 20 ounces, 20] ounces and 34 ounces. A small box of detergent could weigh (depending on the name) 15 ounces, 20 ounces or 21 ounces.
In these circumstances, the only way to figure out the best buy is with a sliderule, or maybe a computer. What is wrong with plain old pints and quarts, pounds and half-pounds? Could not the shopper's lot be made a bit easier? Or are the manufacturers deliberately trying to confuse her?
The purpose of my bill, Mr. Speaker, is to make it easier for the consumer. I hope that the government and the members of this house will facilitate the passage of the measure and give the government departments, both trade and commerce and health and welfare, as well as the new consumers advisory council, an opportunity to do their work as they should, without having their arms tied behind their backs.


Mr, Macdonald:: Before the hon. member takes his seat, I wonder if I could ask him a question about his bill? Do I understand correctly that he is suggesting the administration should decide, in connection with cans of soup, for instance, that only cans of a certain size may be used by a manufacturer, and none other? Is that a correct interpretation?


David Orlikow: That is correct. If the hon. member or the minister wish to have the details of what is involved in this bill they can get the evidence in the hearings that were held in the United States on the bill proposed by Senator Philip A. Hart of Michigan. Extensive and detailed hearings were held in which government and industry spokesmen gave full testimony. I believe all the information could be secured from this source.


Mr. Marvin Gelber (York South):: We live
today in a society which is very largely dominated by advertising techniques and advertising philosophies. There is a story told of a man who said to his wife, "My dear, I have been made a vice president." She looked very sceptical and he said, "Are you not surprised?" She said, "Well, down at the groceteria there is a vice president in charge of prunes". He was incredulous, so he phoned the groceteria and said, "I want to speak to the vice president in charge of prunes". The girl said, "Yes, bulk or packaged?"
The advertisers, associated with the psychologists, in studying the mores of our society 

can almost predict our wants and can almost instruct us upon what we should buy. There is a story told by Vance Packard in his "The Hidden Persuaders" about a conversation between two psychologists. One of them said, "Now, take the man who drives a Studebaker, smokes Old Golds, uses cream-based hair oil, an electric shaver, carries a Parker 51 fountain pen. Obviously he's a salesman, an active man, aggressive in face to face situations and wants to make a good impression. Probably he was quite a romantic type in his youth". And the other psychologist added: "Also, you'll find that he is wearing loud shorts."
The psychologists, Mr. Speaker, allied with the merchandisers have developed a study of the techniques of impulse buying. As a matter of fact one psychologist who was studying merchandising techniques, realizing he could not give a lie detector test to the women who were shopping as to their reasons for choosing one product rather than another, decided to place a motion picture camera in a store to photograph the ladies as they went through the store. He counted the number of times her eyes blinked as an indication of how tense she was in making her merchandising decisions. The results were surprising to him. Instead of becoming more and more tense as she went through the store she became more and more relaxed. As a matter of fact, the blinking of her eyes decreased as she was going up and down the aisles to the extent that it became half of the normally expected rate.
A person can go into a store today and instead of facing the possibility of buying 600 items, he can choose between 6,000 and
8,000	items. The point made by the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Orlikow) is a very salient comment about the merchandising habits of our society. I think that the individual salesman selling his wares can compare with the improved merchandising of, let us say, groceries. It has been discovered as the result of studies, that people going into a self-serve groceteria will buy a considerably larger number of items than people going into a grocery store in which they are served by a salesman. Impulse buying is that important. The person being sold by a salesman has time to weigh the pros and cons of a decision and may decide not to buy, whereas a person subject to impulse buying goes into a store in which the position of the item in the store, the colour of the package, the size of the package, the name of the item, are all decided on a scientific basis in order to induce the purchaser

to make his decision. When a person leaves the store he will have more items, it has been discovered, than he would have had if he had been served by a salesman. It has been discovered also that if there is any person more susceptible to impulse buying than the housewife, it is her husband. Men are even more subject to impulse buying than women.
As a result of these studies it has been decided that the size of the package, the colour of the package, the format, all these things are very important in terms of merchandising a product. The hon. member has introduced a bill concerning packaging. He mentioned the question of toothpaste in support of the point he made. I should like to read from the Consumers' Report of May, 1963 concerning one of the best known brands of toothpaste sold on this market. The report says that your correspondent's difficulty may be stated briefly as follows: One large tube, 1* ounces plus one family tube, ounces equals 6J ounces for 98 cents, as against two giant tubes, 2J ounces each equalling 5if ounces for 99 cents. The result is, Mr. Speaker, that the person buying the giant size tube of toothpaste is paying 22.61 cents per ounce while the person buying the family size tube pays 17.23 cents per ounce, a difference of more than 5 cents per ounce for the same brand of toothpaste, depending upon the size of the package.
Here is a form of what someone might call disguised taxation. Certainly there is a very wide differential between the merchandising packages. A very substantial levy is made on the people of Canada and the United States as well as other countries subject to this type of merchandising because of the packaging methods which are being used. Recently, in the field of cosmetics, the question of hollow wall packaging was examined by the attorney general of California. He accused 23 leading cosmetic companies of using deceptive packaging. It was found that by varying the package the customer was completely misled as to the amount of the product he was buying.
A very interesting study was made of aspirin in Baltimore city hospitals. Five different brands were examined and there was a report of the findings in the journal of the American medical association, December 29, 1962. I would like to quote from the report in Consumers' Report, where it says this:
Weights and Measures Act
Within days after the report appeared, the manufacturer of Bayer aspirin and the distributor of St. Joseph's aspirin began to capitalize on the fact that their products came out rather well in the study. Most upsetting to the federal trade commission and the American medical association was the advertising for Bayer aspirin which boasted that a "government-supported medical team," whose findings "were reported in the highly authoritative journal of the American medical association," had found the Bayer product equal to the higher-priced pain reliever. The ad further claimed that "Bayer aspirin brings relief that is as fast, as strong, and as gentle to the stomach as you can get. ...Bayer aspirin had a somewhat higher pain relief score than any of the other products."
In point of fact the study proved there was no difference in the pain relieving capabilities of the different brands, but that two brands, which contained phenacetin, tended to give more stomach upset.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to read a few extracts from a conference on consumer problems, sponsored by the Consumers' Association of Canada, to which the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Orlikow) referred, in co-operation with the consumers union of the United States, held at Queen's University in 1962. I would like to read a comment made by Dr. C. A. Morrell, of the Department of National Health and Welfare, who said this:
Of the 2,263 people who said they wanted a change-
This is in packaging-
-1,061 wanted to change them because they thought packages were deceptive. This is nearly one in five people questioned and I think it is enough to give the packaging industry a reason for a critical review of what they are doing...
Although the possibility of deception is the main reason for Food and Drug to be interested in packaging, there are other reasons too. Packages should be of such construction and material that they cause no health hazards to the consumer. It is my feeling that some study should be made of vacuum sealed plastic packages to determine whether they should be used at all for packing certain kinds of meat and fish. Deaths from botulism derived from smoked fish sold in vacuum packed plastic containers occurred recently. Experimentally, at least, it has been possible to show the development of staphylococcus toxin in bacon, similarly packaged. The point to note is that under this kind of packaging the usual spoilage organisms did not develop and so the warning signs of bad odour and appearance were not there. Our own laboratory people said that had they not known the facts they would have had no objections to eating either the fish or bacon-they looked and smelled like good fish and bacon. New forms of packaging should not be introduced without careful forethought and study of possible hazards.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Marvin Gelber: Certainly.

Weights and Measures Act


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Does he think he could cure this evil by legislation or by competition? Which would he accept?


Marvin Gelber: I would say in reply that it says in the Bible that when the Babylonian king was having a feast a hand appeared and wrote on the wall "Mene, mene, Tekel, Up-harsin,"-"Counted, counted, weighed and found wanting"-or in today's terms that the Toledo scales showed there was a short weight measure. I think, Mr. Speaker, if we have people to inspect scales to make sure they are giving accurate measure we should also inspect all packages to see that their prepackaged measure is accurate.
I would like to refer again to the committee set up by the Minister of National Health and Welfare. On August 10 the minister announced the appointment of a committee, the consumers advisory committee, and she said, as recorded at page 6581 of Hansard, that it is to do the following:
(a) To consider and advise the minister on such questions relating to the operation of the Food and Drugs Act and the Proprietary or Patent Medicine Act as she may refer to the committee; and (b) to give consideration and advice to the minister on such matters relating to the operation of the Food and Drugs Act and the Proprietary or Patent Medicine Act from the point of view of consumer interest as the committee shall see fit.
I do believe the very important matter raised by the hon. member for Winnipeg North in this bill will be of great concern to that committee, and will certainly give guidance to them in their meetings.
The hon. member referred to Senator Hart of the United States senate and said his bill was inspired by the Hart bill. I would like to read a comment made by Senator Hart before the 47th national conference on weights and measures in 1962, the report of which was published by the United States department of commerce. He said this:
It seems to me that what is required are definite standards against which packages and labels can be measured. Enforcement then requires only measurement against the standard; not a determination of whose definition of "conspicuousness" or "misleading" is correct.
Standards, whether in the law or in regulation, give to the manufacturer greater freedom to compete on the basis of price and quality. He can plan his merchandizing campaign knowing that his competitor will be held to the same packaging and labeling standards as himself. And he can spend the large sums necessary for packaging and labeling equipment, materials and printing, secure in the knowledge that his packages and labels conform to the law and regulations because the law is certain and precise.


The hon. gentleman who has introduced this bill, No. C-47, merits the thanks of the house for having brought the matter up for public discussion. The name of Senator Hart's bill, to which reference has been made, is the truth in packaging bill. In this country the problems raised in the hon. member's bill are of concern to the Department of Trade and Commerce, and also to the Department of National Health and Welfare, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Fisheries, and some of the matters raised in this bill are not related to the Weights and Measures Act which it is seeking to amend. In fact I do not know if some of the matters raised in this bill are within the competence of this parliament because some lawyers think they are trespassing on provincial jurisdiction. Certainly many of the items in it have a great deal of merit. Clause l(p) speaks of weight, measure, quantity or count, and this adds nothing to our existing law except "count." It is doubtful if that type of regulation, that kind of item or that type of consideration will come under the Weights and Measures Act. Certainly under the Criminal Code of Canada miscount is an offence.
With reference to clause l(q)(i) it speaks of "standard size designation," and I am doubtful about this. I am not a lawyer, but I believe legal opinion would not support this because "standard size designation" could come within provincial government jurisdiction.
Clause l(q)(ii) reads:
-the net quantity of the contents of any prepackaged goods, in terms of weight, measure or count, that shall constitute a serving and shall be used where the goods are in a wrapper or container-
It is doubtful if "serving" would come within the competence of the Weights and Measures Act.
Clause 1 (qXiii) reads:
.. .the standard quantative designation of the contents of any prepackaged goods that shall be used when the net quantity of the contents cannot meaningly be designated in terms of weight, measure or count,...
This refers to quality and it seems to me that the acts of this parliament cannot ensure quality of performance to satisfy the anticipations of the customer. It seems to me that is a rather broad conception.
Subclause (qXiv) certainly has merit, as do (rXi) and (rXii). Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to read a quotation from the Cohen report on English company law, where it said this:

No system can wholly protect fools from their own folly or from the knavery of others, and the advantages of trying to do so as fully as possible have to be weighed against the disadvantages of imposing fetters on business conducted honestly and efficiently.
Merchandising is changing so rapidly and the power of advertising in our society is so persuasive that the questions raised by the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Orli-kow) have a special meaning. We could well look at our federal legislation, and the provinces could well look at their legislation, to see whether the problems to which the hon. member has drawn attention are being adequately dealt with.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The hon. member for Lotbiniere.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Hear, hear.


Auguste Choquette: I wish to thank my personal friend, Red Skelton, for his encouraging support.

Mr. Speaker, the bill now before us is very interesting, and I am sure that its sponsor was prompted by a very generous intention.
The purpose is to avoid as much as possible all misrepresentations, all attempts at trickery in which businessmen and dealers are often tempted to indulge.
But first, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a remark to the house. The purpose of this bill is to amend subsection 1 of section 35 of the Weights and Measures Act.
Let us read, for instance, some provisions of that act.
(p)	the weight, measure, quantity or count, or the fraction or multiple thereof of the contents of the wrapper or container of any pre-packaged goods;
The next paragraph reads as follows:
(q)	the establishment and definition of-
That only goes to show that the language of administrative legislation is a real jargon. In any act concerning administrative legislation, whether it be the Bankruptcy Act or the act concerning which an amendment is now before us, the Criminal Code or any branch of the administrative legislation, we always find that inevitable complexity, that real inextricable maze, as I said a while ago, which constitutes more or less a kind of despotism imposed upon the people.
There is an old principle that says: No one is supposed to be ignorant of the law.
Take the tax act, the Bankruptcy Act or any act of that kind in which merely a sub-
Weights and Measures Act section of one section, among many others, is to be amended. How can it be maintained in such circumstances that nobody is supposed to ignore the law?	[DOT]
I wish to make the following comment. I urge all those who are responsible for the drafting of legislation to try to clear up their wording, so that it may be understood by every citizen, if the principle that no one is supposed to ignore the law is to be applied.
The contrary is preposterous and stupid.
Imagine paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of section 35 of a piece of legislation among thousands of others. And the citizens are supposed to comply with the law and understand that legal jargon.
This is absurd and contrary to reason.
Mr. Speaker, I feel it is time that the members of parliament, representatives of the people, do something to make legislative texts truly accessible to any citizen subject to common law.
I appeal to all hon. members so that our legislative texts can be rid of all that mumbo jumbo ordinary citizens cannot understand.
If that is not done, let no one say that everyone must know the law. With texts such as this one, I say that no one should know the law, even members of parliament, maybe the latter least of all.
Mr. Speaker, after those preliminary remarks-


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Would the hon. member care to explain to the house what we are going to do for all the unemployed lawyers if his suggestions are carried out?


Auguste Choquette: I highly appreciate my hon. colleague's sense of humour.
Indeed, if there is a party that has fought unemployment, as we have done here, on this side of the house, if there is a political formation which has really wanted to deal with unemployment, it is the party to which my hon. friend belongs. I am convinced that the suggestion he just made is most appropriate. As a matter of fact, there is no doubt that there are many lawyers who are unemployed because they cannot get elected as members of parliament. Therefore, it would be a good thing to avail ourselves of their talent and services so they could try and clarify the true wording of our administrative law.
A little earlier, while studying that bill, another thought occurred to me. There again,

Weights and Measures Act I think I have the support of my hon. friends of the New Democratic party.
There is talk about parliamentary reform. The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre Mr. Churchill)-


Mr. Prud'homme:: Winnipeg North Centre.


Auguste Choquette: The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) because the other, the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre, often loses his bearings. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre made very appropriate suggestions to reform our parliamentary system.
Personally, I humbly submitted a few suggestions to the committee of the house on procedure and organization-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. The hon. member will understand that he has to speak to the prindiple of the bill under consideration.
I feel that he is now drifting quite far from the matter under discussion.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I think truth in packaging in the House of Commons would be a good idea, too.


Auguste Choquette: It would be a good idea, but what I want to make clear to my hon. friends opposite is that a bill of this type has, first of all, a technical aspect and requires the advice of experts in the commercial publicity field. As everybody can see, the bill is rather difficult to read and even to understand on account of what I would term the jumble of our legal terms. Is it not contrary to the parliamentary reforms advocated by our hon. friends opposite to consider matters requiring technical knowledge, the hearing of witnesses and which, more or less, call for some kind of survey in order to ascertain to what extent the public is being misled and to what extent also the people are satisfied?
I fail to see how a parliament could lose one hour of its time to consider amending a paragraph or a section, among several, in an act lost in a jumble of other legislation connected with administrative law. As this seems to be nothing but an administrative matter, parliament should not be bothered with it for a whole hour, when there are other very urgent problems to settle. We should not be bothered or importuned with such technical details.
I feel that at certain times, legislators should confine themselves to matters of great scope dealing with major and important principles. They should not be asked to devote

one hour of their time uselessly, since it seems that the bill is not going to be passed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, would the hon. member permit a question? Does he not realize that this bill is so drafted that it would give to the administration the opportunity to make all the regulations? Does he not realize that the bill actually meets the very point he is making; that we should not deal with it here but that we give the power to make regulations to the government?


Auguste Choquette: Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member says is partly true, but should parliament devote its efforts to those little regulations, or rather put all its energy into working out an over-all type of legislation? I think this belongs in the administrative field; each department employs legal advisers who are able to see and find out how the consumers are to be protected. They are aware of any restrictions which should be imposed on dealers and merchants who might take advantage of the consumers in general. This is strictly our administrative matter. The government provides in each department, for legal advisers who are paid with the people's money and who are responsible for advising the government with regard to the form of each piece of legislation, so as to make it more adaptable and useful in its practical application.
That is precisely why I cannot understand that the hon. member who introduced the bill, who calls himself a member of a reform party, should ask the house to waste its time in considering technicalities. Therefore, I think that rather we should ask the legal advisers of the department concerned for their opinion. Indeed, we see that by asking for expert advice-and I am not thinking of legal advisers, because I have had no contact with them-but after consulting knowledgeable people in this field, we have been informed that this bill will alter precisely nothing from a practical point of view. Even if it were passed as it now stands, consumers would have the same protection and dealers would be limited by the same restrictions. Consequently, Mr. Speaker, parliament has been down-graded by a useless logomachy whereas it should have been maintained on a proper plane.
That is why I am disgusted with the hour spent in discussion of insignificant details which merely concern the opinion or legal advice of the department concerned.

Weights and Measures Act
If we tried to explain in this manner how the government works instead of in the way my hon. friends wish, I am convinced the public would only have admiration for the efforts we are putting forth.
Mr. Speaker, those are the views of a junior member of the house.


Mr. D. S. Macdonald (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, it is with some reluctance that I rise to follow one of the main dramatic events in order to make a few pedestrian remarks about the bill in question. I would like to cite three particular considerations which I would submit to the house are reasons why the bill should not be adopted. The first relates to the philosophy of law itself; the second relates to the division of jurisdiction between the federal and provincial governments; and the third relates to Canada's international obligations, more particularly those under the general agreement on tariffs and trade.
I was very much surprised that none of the members of the official opposition rose, when they had the opportunity to do so, to speak on this subject, in view of the fact that the bill proposes-and to this extent I disagree with my colleague the hon. member for Lot-biniere (Mr. Choquette)-a very substantial administration for the purpose of setting down the standards which will have to be followed in every case.
The house will recall that at the conclusion of the remarks of the hon. member for
Winnipeg North (Mr. Orlikow) I asked him whether he really proposed that the government was to decree the size of containers to be used in respect of any particular product. He agreed with me that this was his contention. While I referred to one particular product, it will be obvious to hon. members that there will have to be a great multiplicity of administrative decisions, rules and orders to decide the size of cans, containers, boxes, bags and other packages in which merchandise is retailed, and it will require a vast addition to the bureaucracy for the purpose of determining these questions. In this respect I would point out that it is very much different from the fundamental purpose of the Weights and Measures Act, which in essence can be enforced by a-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. I apologize for interrupting the parliamentary secretary, but I should point out that the time for the consideration of private members' business has now expired.


Stanley Howard Knowles: He should apologize, not you.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[The following item was passed In committee of supply this day]:

[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration, $1,130,500.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, August 17, 1964