1964-04-08

Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolieile-L'Assomplion-Monlcalm):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.
I asked the Associate Minister of National Defence if officers' commissions were written in both languages. Last Thursday, April 2, the minister answered as follows:
I am pleased to inform my hon. friend that officers' commissions have always been, and still are, obtainable in both languages.
I have here an open letter, published in the press and signed by Mr. Francois Gendron of the Canadian cadet service, in which he complains that the Department of National Defence sent him a commission written in English only.


Hon. Lucien Cardin (Associate Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, I doubt very
much that this is a question of privilege; nevertheless I will repeat to my hon. friend that commissions may be obtained in either English or French; the candidate can select either language.
A memorandum was even sent to all candidates reminding them that they can obtain their commissions in both languages.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. Langlois: 1.	What sums of money did the Department of Public Works appropriate for works to be undertaken in the constituency of Megantic?
2.	What are the federal buildings in the constituency of Megantic?
3.	Where are they located, by whom are they administered and what is the yearly cost of this administration?


Mr. McWilliam:: $36,800 for the fiscal year 1964-65. That amount includes maintenance charges.
2.
Location Black Lake Disraeli Plessisville
Robertsonville St. Ferdinand Thetford Mines
Departments housed Post Office
Post Office and Unemployment Insurance Agriculture, Post Office and Unemployment Insurance Post Office Post Office
National Revenue, Post Office and Unemployment Insurance
Building Public building Public building Public building
Public building Public building Public building
3.
Location	Administerd	Annual maintenance
	by	cost
Black Lake	D.P.W.	$ 2,820Disraeli	D.P.W.	4,044Plessisville	D.P.W.	5,664Robertsonville	D.P.W.	1,722St. Ferdinand d'Halifax	D.P.W.	2,240Thetford Mines	D.P.W.	17,60720220-120i


INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE IN WORLD FAIR
Mr. Latulippe: 1.	To date, how many countries have been asked by the world exhibition commissioner, Mr. Du-puy to participate in the 1967 world exhibition?
2.	What countries have been invited, how many have accepted the invitation and how many expect to do so in the near future?
3.	Were these invitations made by Canadian embassies, consulates or legations abroad and, if so (a) to whom were they made (b) by whom were they made (c) what responses were received?
Questions



Answer: 1. Invitations to participate in the 1967 world exhibition have been extended through diplomatic channels, as required by the international convention of 1928, to 133 countries and territories.
2.	Attached is a list of countries invited. To date the acceptances of seven countries have been announced and the corporation is in correspondence with 35 to 50 others about their prospective participation. Those which have accepted are Austria, Belgium, Britain, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Morocco and the Netherlands. It would not be in the public interest or courteous to the countries concerned to mention those which have indicated inability to participate. Already two countries which at first declined have now seen their way clear to participate. It would not be helpful to list those countries which, for the moment, indicate their inability to attend.
3.	See attached list and answer to question 2.
Government-Invitation issued by:
Afghanistan: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations in New York, U.S.A.
Albanian Peoples Republic: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations in New York, U.S.A.
Algeria: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations in New York, U.S.A.
Argentina:	Canadian Embassy, Buenos
Aires, Argentina.
Antigua: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London, England.
Australia: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Canberra, Australia.
Austria: Canadian Embassy, Vienna, Austria.
Barbados: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London, England.
Belgium: Canadian Embassy, Brussels, Belgium.
Bolivia: Canadian Embassy, Lima, Peru. (Canadian Ambassador to Peru also accredited to Government of Bolivia.)
Brazil: Canadian Embassy, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Britain: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London.
British Guiana: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London, England.
British Honduras: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London, England.
Bulgaria: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations in New York, U.S.A.
Burma: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. (Canadian High Commissioner to Malaysia also accredited to government of Burma.)

Government-Invitation issued by:
Burundi: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Byelorussia: Canadian Embassy, Moscow, U.S.S.R.
Cambodia: Canadian Embassy, Washington, D.C.
Cameroon:	Canadian Embassy, Yaounde,
Cameroon.
Central African Republic: Canadian Embassy, Yaounde, Cameroon (Canadian Ambassador to Cameroon also accredited to government of C.A.R.).
Ceylon: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Colombo, Ceylon.
Chad: Canadian Embassy, Yaounde, Cameroon (Canadian Ambassador to Cameroon also accredited to government of Chad).
Chile: Canadian Embassy, Santiago, Chile.
China, Republic of: Department of External Affairs to Chinese Embassy in Ottawa.
Colombia: Canadian Embassy, Bogota, Colombia.
Congo (Capital:	Brazzaville):	Canadian
Embassy, Yaounde, Cameroon, (Canadian Ambassador to Cameroon also accredited to government of Congo (Brazzaville)).
Congo (Capital:	Leopoldville):	Canadian
Embassy, Leopoldville, Congo.
Costa Rica: Canadian Embassy, San Josd, Costa Rica.
Cuba: Canadian Embassy, Havana, Cuba.
Cyprus: Canadian Embassy, Tel Aviv, Israel (Canadian Ambassador to Israel also accredited to the government of Cyprus).
Czechoslovakia: Canadian Embassy, Prague, Czechoslovakia.
Dahomey: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Lagos, Nigeria. (High Commissioner to Nigeria also accredited to government of Dahomey).
Denmark: Canadian Embassy, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Dominica: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London, England.
Dominican Republic: Canadian Embassy, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.
Ecuador: Canadian Embassy, Quito, Ecuador.
El Salvador: Canadian Embassy, San Josd, Costa Rica (Canadian Ambassador to Costa Rica also accredited to government of El Salvador).
Ethiopia: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Finland: Canadian Embassy, Helsinki, Finland.
France: Canadian Embassy, Paris, France.
Gabon: Canadian Embassy, Yaounde, Cameroon. (Canadian Ambassador to Cameroon also accredited to government of Gabon).
Germany: Canadian Embassy, Bonn, Germany.

Government-Invitation issued by:
Ghana: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Accra, Ghana.
Greece: Canadian Embassy, Athens, Greece.
Grenada: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London, England.
Guatemala: Canadian Embassy, Guatemala City, Guatemala.
Guinea: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Accra, Ghana (High Commissioner while resident in Accra is also Canadian Ambassador to Guinea).
Haiti: Canadian Embassy, Port au Prince, Haiti.
Honduras: Canadian Embassy, San Jose, Costa Rica (Canadian Ambassador to Costa Rica while resident in San Jose is also Canadian Ambassador to Honduras).
Hong Kong: Canadian Government Trade Commissioner, Hong Kong.
Hungary: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Iceland: Canadian Embassy, Oslo, Norway (Canadian Ambassador to Norway also accredited to Government of Iceland).
India: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, New Delhi, India.
Indonesia:	Canadian Embassy, Djakarta,
Indonesia.
Iran: Canadian Embassy, Tehran, Iran.
Iraq: Canadian Embassy, Beirut, Lebanon (Canadian Ambassador to Lebanon also accredited to government of Iraq).
Ireland: Canadian Embassy, Dublin, Ireland.
Israel: Canadian Embassy, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Italy: Canadian Embassy, Rome, Italy.
Ivory Coast: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Accra, Ghana (Canadian High Commissioner to Ghana also accredited to government of Ivory Coast).
Jamaica: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Kingston, Jamaica.
Japan: Canadian Embassy, Tokyo, Japan.
Jordan: Canadian Embassy, Beirut, Lebanon.
Kenya: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations in New York, U.S.A.
Korea, Republic of: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations in New York, U.S.A.
Kuwait: Canadian Embassy, Washington, D.C.
Lebanon: Canadian Embassy Beirut, Lebanon.
Laos: Canadian Embassy, Washington, D.C.
Liberia: Permanent Mission of Canada to United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Libya: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Liechtenstein: Canadian Embassy, Berne.
Questions
Government-Invitation issued by:
Luxembourg: Canadian Embassy, Brussels, Belgium. (Canadian Ambassador to Belgium also accredited to government of Luxembourg.
Madagascar: Permanent Mission of Canada to United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Malaysia: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Mali: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Mauretania: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations in New York, U.S.A.
Mexico: Canadian Embassy, Mexico City, Mexico.
Monaco: Canadian Embassy, Paris, France.
Mongolian Peoples Republic: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations in New York, U.S.A.
Montserrat: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London, England.
Morocco: Canadian Embassy, Madrid, Spain, (Canadian Ambassador to Spain also accredited to government of Morocco).
Nepal: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Netherlands:	Canadian Embassy, The
Hague, Netherlands.
New Zealand: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Wellington, New Zealand.
Nicaragua: Canadian Embassy, San Jose, Costa Rica. (Canadian Ambassador to Costa Rica als accredited to government of Nicaragua).
Niger: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Lagos, Nigeria. (Canadian High Commissioner to Nigeria also accredited to government of Niger).
Norway: Canadian Embassy, Oslo, Norway.
Nigeria: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Lagos, Nigeria.
Pakistan: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Karachi, Pakistan.
Panama:	Canadian Embassy, San Josd,
Costa Rica, (Canadian Ambassador to Costa Rica also accredited to government of Panama).
Paraguay:	Canadian Embassy, Buenos
Aires, Argentina. (Canadian Ambassador to Argentina also accredited to government of Paraguay.
Peru: Canadian Embassy, Lima, Peru.
Philippines: Canadian Consulate-General, Manila, Philippines.
Poland: Canadian Embassy, Warsaw, Poland.
Puerto Rico: Canadian Embassy, Washington, D. C.
Portugal:	Canadian Embassy, Lisbon,
Portugal.
Rumania: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, U.S.A.

Questions
Government-Invitation issued by:
Rwanda: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, USA.
Saudi Arabia:	Permanent Mission of
Canada to the United Nations, New York, USA.
San Marino: Canadian Embassy, Rome, Italy.
Senegal: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Lagos, Nigeria (High Commissioner to Nigeria also accredited to government of Senegal).
Sierra Leone: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Lagos, Nigeria. (Canadian High Commissioner to Nigeria also accredited to government of Sierra Leone).
Somalia: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
South Africa: Canadian Embassy, Pretoria, South Africa.
Spain: Canadian Embassy, Madrid, Spain.
St. Christopher-Nevis-Anouilla: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London, England.
St. Lucia: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London, England.
St. Vincent: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, London, England.
Sudan: Canadian Embassy, Cairo, U.A.R. (Canadian Ambassador to U.A.R. also accredited to government of Sudan).
Sweden: Canadian Embassy, Stockholm, Sweden.
Switzerland:	Canadian Embassy, Berne,
Switzerland.
Syria: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Tanganyika: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Dar-es-Salaam, Tanganyika.
Thailand: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, (Canadian High Commissioner to Malaysia also accredited to government of Thailand).
Togo: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Accra, Ghana (Canadian High Commissioner to Ghana also accredited to government of Togo).
Trinidad and Tobago: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Port-of-Spain, Trinidad.
Upper Volta: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Accra, Ghana (Canadian High Commissioner to Ghana also accredited to government of Upper Volta).
Uruguay: Canadian Embassy, Montevideo, Uruguay.
Vatican: Department of External Affairs to Apostolic Delegate in Ottawa.
Venezuela:	Canadian Embassy, Caracas,
Venezuela.
Viet Nam, Republic of: Canadian Embassy,
Washington, D.C.
[Mr. Latulippe.l
Government-Invitation issued by:
Western Samoa: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada, Wellington, New Zealand.
Yemen: Permanent Mission of Canada to United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Yugoslavia: Canadian Embassy, Belgrade, Yugoslavia.
Zanzibar: Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations, New York, U.S.A.
Tunisia: Canadian Embassy, Berne, Switzerland (Canadian Ambassador to Switzerland also accredited to government of Tunisia).
Turkey: Canadian Embassy, Ankara, Turkey.
Uganda: Office of the High Commissioner for Canada Dar-es-Salaam, Tanganyika (Canadian High Commissioner to Tanganyika also accredited to government of Uganda).
Ukraine:	Canadian Embassy, Moscow,


U.S.S.R.
[Stage Direction]
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics: Canadian Embassy, Moscow, U.S.S.R.
United Arab Republic: Canadian Embassy, Cairo, U.A.R.
United States of America: Canadian Embassy, Washington, D.C.

Mr. Gregoire: 1.	Is It the policy of the Department of Public Works, in purchasing maintenance supplies for public buildings, to buy such supplies locally?
2.	Is this policy followed in Lapointe county?
3.	How much did the department spend in Lapointe county, in 1963, on such maintenance products as soap, wax, paper, etc.?
4.	How much was spent outside Lapointe county for those supplies which were to be used within the county?


George Roy McWilliam: 1. No. In the case of supplies which can be bought wholesale and which it was found to be more economical to buy from the manufacturer and to deliver wherever they are needed, the department's policy is to buy them wholesale.
2.	The policy stated in answer No. 1 is followed in Lapointe county.
3.	Nil.
4.	$1,150.91.


CIVIL DEFENCE OFFICERS
Mr. Latulippe: 1.	Is there an officer in any department of the federal government primarily responsible for civil defence?
2.	Who is responsible in each of the Canadian provinces and in the Northwest and Yukon Territories?

3.	Is there a federal commissioner of civil defence and, if so, in what manner is his office organized and how does it operate?
4.	Among the Canadian armed forces, are there any specialized units for civil defence operations?
5.	Has the government had any fairly recent talks on the subject of civil defence with the provincial attorneys general or representatives of the premiers of the provinces?
6.	How many emergency centres and underground stations has the government built in (a) each province (b) what were the costs involved (c) who will be in charge of such stations?


Mr. Lamonlagne:: 1. The director of the federal emergency measures organization is responsible for co-ordinating the emergency planning activities of all federal departments and agencies, and providing assistance and guidance to provincial authorities.
2.	Each province has appointed an officer who is in charge of the emergency planning activities in that province. Similarly, in the Yukon and Northwest Territories, the territorial authorities have designated emergency measures co-ordinators. The federal E.M.O. also has officers in each provincial capital to co-ordinate federal emergency planning activities with the plans developed by provincial authorities.
3.	There is no official with the formal title of federal commissioner of civil defence. As has already been stated, the co-ordination of civil emergency planning at the federal level is the responsibility of the director of the emergency measures organization. Pursuant to order in council 1963-993 the organization has the status of a department of government. The Minister of Industry is the responsible minister. The organization is comprised of a headquarters staff in Ottawa, a civil defence college at Arnprior, and offices in each provincial capital.
4.	All units both regular and militia undergo training in national survival and rescue work. At army headquarters there is a senior officer (major-general survival) with a staff, who is responsible for developing policy and plans for the Canadian army's role in survival operations and for the co-ordination of such matters with other government departments.
5.	The last meeting with provincial ministers responsible for civil emergency planning was held in Ottawa on December 3, 1962, at which time all provinces were represented.
6.	(a) A major emergency operating centre has been built in each of the following provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. In addition there is a complex of emergency facilities in the vicinity of Ottawa, (b) $55,610,000 including land, buildings, and equipment, (c) The emergency measures organization has been charged with the responsibility for developing these operating centres under arrangements with the army whereby the latter
Questions
is responsible for their maintenance, operation, and security.


DUTIES OF POSTMASTERS WHERE RURAL POST OFFICES CONSTRUCTED
Mr. Coates: Will any postmasters be relieved of their duties as a result of the construction of new post offices in rural communities?


Mr. Nicholson:: There will be no change in postmasterships as a result of the construction of new post offices in rural communities, provided the postmaster will meet the conditions of employment and is wilhng to move to the new building.


* CONTRACT FOR HEADSTONES AND MARKERS, HALIFAX, N.S.
Mr. Coates: Was the successful bidder, W. T. Dauphinee Limited, Shelburne, Nova Scotia, for the headstones and markers in the Halifax district for the Department of Veterans Affairs for the 12 month period commencing October 1, 1963, the bidder who submitted the lowest bid of $12,400 and, if not, which firm submitted the low bid of $12,400?


Mr. Teillel:: The successful bidder, W. T. Dauphinee Limited, Shelburne, Nova Scotia, was not the bidder, who submitted the lowest bid of $12,400. The firm of Tingley Monuments Ltd., Amherst, Nova Scotia submitted the low bid of $12,400.
Treasury board have ratified and confirmed the action of the department in accepting the tender of W. T. Dauphinee Limited.


VETERANS HOSPITAL, LANCASTER, N.B.
Mr. Bell: 1.	What was the total cost of the Lancaster D.V.A. hospital?
2.	How many patients have been treated each year since the end of world war II?
3.	What percentage of these patients were from outside the Saint John metropolitan area?
4.	What percentage of the patients are chronically ill?
5.	What is the cost per bed per day?
6.	What is the number of employees with their general classifications?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: 1. $4,729,993, including improvements and alterations to March 31, 1964.
2.	1949, 3,725; 1950, 3,889; 1951, 3,352; 1952,
3,373; 1953,	3,784;	1954,	3,901;	1955,	4,225;1956, 4,076;	1957,	3,602;	1958,	3,867;	1959,4,318; 1960,	3,902;	1961,	3,457;	1962,	3,816;
1963, 3,679.
3.	69 per cent at present. Past figures unknown.
4.	35 per cent.
5.	The average cost per patient day is $20.42.
6.	Number of employees and general classifications at March 1, 1964: housekeeping

Questions
and maintenance, 189; administrative, 3; clerical and secretarial, 58; technical, 18; professional, 30; dietary, 18; nursing, 190; total, 506.


LUMBER EXPORTS
Mr. Laprise: 1.	How many board feet of timber and lumber have been exported, since 1953 (a) from Canada
(b) from each Canadian province?
2.	What was the annual value of exports from each province since 1953?

Answer: 1. and 2. Statistics of exports by province of origin are not available. The figures contained in the attached table indicate the exports through the customs ports located in each province.


FIGURES FOR EXPORTS THROUGH CUSTOMS PORTS IN EACH PROVINCE
[Stage Direction]
1953	1954	1955	1956	1957	195S	1959	1960	1961	1962	1963
					Quantity in board feet						
Newfoundland	
Prince Edward	239	109	2,641	48	97	3,477	684	1,977	2,103	1,219	1,444Island	4	8	3	6	3	2	-	-	-	-	-Nova Scotia	44,907	74,701	88,766	60,530	50,198	28,876	26,015	30,637	50,706	57,680	58,183New Brunswick...	114,968	110,412	128,706	104,839	68,155	66,585	71,197	99,546	89,478	108,980	117,599Quebec	243,073	262,266	343,723	296,090	259,063	244,150	299,717	331,875	374,618	374,129	352,232Ontario	958,718	1,210,168	1,553,827	1,413,788	1,125,076	1,171,111	1,410,207	1,285,737	1,474,422	1,683,475	1,804,914Manitoba	104,999	139,825	147,138	101,267	127,465	141,580	234,811	199,011	225,064	220,963	194,265Saskatchewan....	415,046	489,611	674,671	723,332	681,904	634,995	615,924	698,222	765,132	937,403	1,051,200Alberta	494	57	51	94	56	71	72	231	380	1,241	1,574British Columbia.	1,481,528	1,745,710	1,663,043	1,235,568	1,323,413	1,631,980	1,510,827	1,926,868	1,954,027	2,074,402	2,656,516Territories	786	645	595	599	67	126	495	229	709	736	747TOTAL	3,364,762	4,033,512	4,603,164	3,936,161	3,635,497	3,922,953	4,169,949	4,574,333	4,936,639	5,460,228	6,238,6741953	1954	1955	1956	1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	1963Value in dollars	Newfoundland	
Prince Edward	17,010	9,372	180,797	3,890	7,196	274,647	55,712	164,755	170,572	98,766	120,944Island	185	416	261	495	195	277	-	-	-	-	-Nova Scotia	3,493,019	5,413,412	6,822,143	4,763,596	3,854,480	2,158,444	1,906,296	2,401,630	3,919,737	4,403,090	4,448,924New Brunswick...	9,835,530	8,926,952	10,835,587	9,313,067	6,197,302	5,861,331	6,170,094	8,401,346	7,392,475	8,978,160	9,569,558Quebec	24,005,716	24,206,573	32,495,260	28,753,657	24,645,572	22,980,054	28,648,738	30,587,782	32,024,363	32,897,406	31,830,406Ontario	79,569,265	92,657,866	124,466,301	115,723,860	85,294,914	85,170,803	110,036,728	96,998,312	102,453,814	118,099,435	127,141,536Manitoba	7,034,979	9,279,250	11,021,983	7,825,462	8,878,034	9,190,075	16,802,381	12,880,240	13,766,224	13,362,096	11,775,035Saskatchewan	35,929,177	41,545,860	58,591,140	59,469,882	50,338,339	47,007,986	48,561,468	50,852,762	52,156,437	63,621,494	70,772,382Alberta	44,799	5,975	5,170	8,653	18,609	6,035	4,822	15,905	29,026	97,859	137,515British Columbia..	122,097,195	142,617,512	140,832,926	100,522,410	102,439,099	119,351,992	110,636,813	143,916,008	142,890,972	155,127,655	196,614,490Territories	75,640	61,090	61,441	60,331	7,211	11,610	47,766	21,391	62,869	61,302	73,936TOTAL	282,102,515	324,724,278	385,313,009	326,445,303	281,680,951	292,013,254	322,870,818	346,300,131	354,866,489	396,747,263	452,484,726
oo
[Stage Direction]


Questions
Questions

Mr. Beaule: 1.	What companies have been approached regarding the sale of the Canadian Arsenals Ltd. plant at Valcartier, Quebec?
2.	How much have these companies offered?
3.	What are the government's latest undertakings in this matter?
4.	As a condition of sale could it be guaranteed that all its employees will be retained by the purchaser and, if not, what percentage of the workers is it expected will be employed by the purchaser?
5.	What will happen to employees who are contributing to the present pension fund?
6.	Should the plant be sold, when would the purchaser take possession?


Mr. Drury:: 1. The sale of the Canadian Arsenals Limited plant at Valcartier has been discussed with two companies, Canadian Industries Limited and Dupont of Canada Limited.
2.	No offer has yet been received.
3.	A tender call for the sale of the Valcartier plant was published throughout Canada on April 2, 1964.
4.	No. In their offers, interested companies will indicate their intentions as to the retention of present employees.
5.	According to the civil service superannuation act, employees may choose a deferred pension, a pension calculated on the basis of actuarial data or the refund of their contributions.
6.	No date can be given until offers are received.


VANDALISM AT POST OFFICE, ST. JOSEPH DE BEAUCE, QUE.
Mr. Perron: 1.	What police forces participated in the inquiry into the acts of vandalism perpetrated at the post office in St. Joseph de Beauce during the night of October 25, 1963?
2.	What was the estimate of the damage?
3.	What was the result of the inquiry?
4.	To what penalty were the guilty parties subjected?
5.	Does the R.C.M.P. consider the case closed?

Answer: The Quebec provincial police and St. Joseph municipal police. The R.C.M.P. was informed of the incident but did not take part in the inquiry.
2.	$120.
3.	The inquiry is not yet completed.
4.	There was no arrest made yet.
5.	Not applicable.


TRANSFER OF CAMP HILL HOSPITAL, HALIFAX
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
Have any discussions taken place or are any contemplated between the Department of Veterans Affairs and any municipal government or the government of Nova Scotia regarding the transfer of Camp Hill hospital at Halifax to either municipal or provincial authority?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: No discussions have taken place. No discussions are contemplated at present.


TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY ROUTE, NEW BRUNSWICK
Mr. Flemming (Vicioria-: Carlelon):
1.	Has the government of Canada agreed to change the route of the trans-Canada highway north of Hartland in Carleton and Victoria counties, province of New Brunswick?
2.	If so, is the newly established route to be on the western side of the Saint John river from a point opposite Hartland to another point at or near Grand Falls?
3.	Is the construction of another bridge contemplated across the Saint John river between the present trans-Canada bridge north of Hartland and the Perth-Andover trans-Canada bridge?
4.	If so, what is the estimated cost of (a) the bridge across the Saint John river (b) the highway from Hartland north (c) what percentage of the total cost has the government of Canada agreed to pay?
5.	Has consideration been given to using No. 2 highway, from the eastern end of the bridge across the Saint John river north of Hartland, in the county of Carleton, N.B., to the eastern end of the already constructed trans-Canada Perth-Andover bridge in the county of Victoria, N.B., with appropriate variation in the standard of width and visibility through built-up areas to lessen dislocation of residents as well as reduce expenses?


Mr. Deschalelels:: 1. No requests for approval of such a change have been received.
2.	Answered by No. 1 above.
3.	No.
4.	Answered by No. 3 above.
5.	Yes, the route of the highway as now designated in the trans-Canada highway agreement follows No. 2 highway between the bridge at Hartland and the Perth-Andover bridge. Provision is also made in the agreement for the bypassing of any of the villages along the route by the shortest practical diversion where warranted by the dangers and inconveniences of passing through these populated areas. No submissions have been received to date from the province of New Brunswick relative to any change in the agreement for the construction of this section of the trans-Canada highway.


TUTOR JET AIRCRAFT
Mr. Stefanson: 1.	How many Tutor jet aircraft has the R.C.A.F. received delivery of to date?

Questions
2.	Have the performance tests of this aircraft been completed?
3.	Where were these carried out?
4.	What are the results?
5.	Have the flying instructors who have been selected to train pilots on this basic jet trainer received their training and, if so, where were they trained?
6.	When will the pilot training program commence with this new jet trainer, and at what R.C.A.F. training stations?
7.	What other aircraft will also be used at these training stations?
Answer: 1. The R.C.A.F. has accepted five Tutor aircraft to date.
2.	The performance trials of the Tutor aircraft are not scheduled for completion until October 1, 1964. To date, only the cold weather portion of the performance trials has been completed.

Answer: 1. Mr. Charles Dumais, Ste Gertrude de Villeneuve.
2.	January 1, 1961.
3.	Four years.
4.	December 31, 1964.
5.	The present contract will be renewed or a new contract awarded effective January 1, 1965.
6.	Mail contracts are normally reviewed three months before expiry at which time a decision is made to renew the contract or invite tenders.


TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY ROUTE, NEW BRUNSWICK
[Stage Direction]
3.	Central experimental and proving establishment at R.C.A.F. station Uplands are responsible for conducting the flying portion of the performance trials. The cold weather trials were conducted at Churchill, Manitoba.
4.	It would be premature to forecast the ultimate results of the performance trials at this time, however, the cold weather trials encountered only minor problems.
5.	No.
6.	It is proposed to commence the ab initio pilot training program in January 1965 at R.C.A.F. station Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan.
7.	"Silver Star" (T-33) aircraft.

Mr. Stefanson: 1.	What construction projects or other improvements have been approved or are planned for R.C.A.F. station Gimli, Manitoba, with estimated cost?
2.	When will tenders be called?
Answer: 1. No construction projects or other improvements are approved or planned for R.C.A.F. station Gimli, Manitoba in the fiscal year 1964-65. Requirements for future years are under consideration but no information is available on estimated costs.
2. Not applicable.


MAIL CONTRACT, AMOS  STE GERTRUDE PREISSAC, QUE.
Mr. Caouette: 1.	Who is the person responsible, or who are the persons responsible, for the transportation of mail from Amos to Ste Gertrude Preissac?
2.	When was the contract awarded?
3.	What is the duration of the contract?
4.	What is the date of termination of the contract?
5.	When will a new contract for transportation of mail be awarded?
6.	Does the Post Office Department intend to call for public tenders?

Question No. 583-Mr. MacRae:
1.	Have consultations been held with the government of New Brunswick relative to the new location for the trans-Canada highway north of Mactaquac, as far as Meductic, both in the county of York, New Brunswick and, if so, has any agreement been reached as to such new location?
2.	What is the estimated cost of this new routing presumably made necessary by the construction of the Mactaquac dam?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. Yes, consultations have been held as to the possible effect of the Mactaquac dam on the location of the trans-Canada highway between Fredericton and Lower Prince William. No changes in the highway location between these points have been agreed upon to date.
2. See answer to No. 1.


MAIL CONTRACT, AMOS-MATTAGAMI, QUE.
Mr. Laprise: Was a new contract awarded for the carrying of mail between Amos and Mattagami and, if so (a) when did this contract come into effect (b) what is the duration of such contract (c) who were the tenderers (d) what is the amount of each tender (e) to whom was the contract awarded?

Answer: (a, b, c and d). A new contract has not been awarded but tenders for a contract of a four year duration have been received as follows:
Edouard Roy, Amos Jean Baptiste Carignan, St. Felix de Dalquier
Georges Carignan, St. Felix de Dalquier
Marcel Perrault, St. Felix de Dalquier
Henri Blais, St. Felix de Dalquier Alphonse Caron, Landrienne Germain Bolduc, box 52, Amos Lorrain Lacroix, 162, 4th avenue, Amos
Fabrien Desrosiers, 11th avenue, R. R. 4, Amos

9.000.	00
9.000.	00
9.360.00
9.500.00
9.600.00
9.900.00
10,000.00
10,000.00

Questions
Aldee Bedard, Rochebaucourt	10,179.00
Narcisse Proulx, Ste Gertrude de
Villeneuve	10,400.00
Fernand De Repentigny, 13 Main st. n., Amos, box 1263	10,450.00
Campbell Transport Ltee, box 89,
Amos	10,686.00
Sylvio Frigon, Landrienne	11,660.00
Andre Pilotte, box 1087, Amos	11,700.00
Paul Marcel Baribeau, R. R. 1,
Amos	11,760.00
Camille Boisvert, La Sarre	11,800.00
Antonio Dessureault, box 87, Amos	11,800.00
Donat Belzil, 1st avenue, Amos	11,850.00
Alexandre Labrecque, box 1735,
Amos	11,880.00
Patrick Sirois, Mattagami	12,000.00
Amedee Plante, St. Felix de Dalquier 12,000.00 Omer Onesime Levesque, 332, 4th avenue, Amos, box 742	12,040.08
Marius Frigon, Landrienne	12,400.00
Wilfrid Bard, box 997, Amos	12,520.00
Gaston Rouleau, box 561, Amos	12,939.00
Wilfrid Charrois, 161 3rd avenue E.,
Amos	12,990.00
Paul Huard, 231, 1st avenue E., box 537, Amos	13,000.00
Viateur Bordeleau, Landrienne	13,000.00
Magny Transport Inc., 40 blvd.
Mercier, Amos	13,500.00
Liguori Dionne, box 582, Amos	13,500.00
Mazenold Service Enrg., blvd.
Gouin, Amos	14,000.00
Gravel Transport Enrg. (Yvon
Gravel) 32, 6th avenue W., Amos	14,164.80
Mrs. Lise Magny, 141 blvd. Mercier, Amos	14,200.00
Adelard Nadeau, St. Felix de Dalquier	14,316.00
Andrien Tardiff, box 244, Amos	14,500.00
Herve Thibault, Amos	14,500.00
Richard Bilodeau, box 171, Amos	14,925.00
Real Ouellet, box 1527, Amos	15,000.00
Gerard Langlois, Amos	15,582.00
Rosaire Samson, R. R. 1, Amos	16,200.00
Wilfrid Trudel, box 1435, Amos	17,882.50
Desire Lacasse, box 516, Amos	20,000.00
Laurent Desrochers, box 851, 31,
3rd avenue E., Amos	21,300.00
(e) Decision pending.


MAIL TRANSPORTATION TO OBEDJIWAN INDIAN RESERVE
Mr. Laprise: Was a postal transportation service established between some postal distribution point and the Indian reserve of Obedjiwan and, if so (a) how many times a week is that service carried on (b) who has the contract?


Answer: Yes, between Sanmaur and Obedjiwan. (a) One trip every two weeks, (b) Laviolette Air Services, Sanmaur, Que.


*DEEP WATER HARBOUR, CHANDLER, QUE.
Mr. Vincent: Does the Department of Public Works intend to construct a deep water harbour at Chandler, Gaspe and, if so (a) what are the estimated costs (b) what percentage will be paid by the government and what percentage by the Gaspe Pulp and Paper Company (c) when will the work begin?


Mr. Robichaud:: The department intends to construct a deep water wharf and a breakwater at Chandler.
(a)	The detailed estimated costs are being prepared.
(b)	Negotiations are being undertaken with a view to reaching an agreement in respect of cost sharing.
(c)	The plans and specifications will be prepared just as soon as a final agreement is reached.


COMPARATIVE COST SURVEY, HAMILTON FALLS HYDRO PROJECT
Mr. Mather: Has the government carried out a study or a survey to ascertain whether Canadian hydro development for Hamilton falls, Labrador has been made uneconomical by the growing availability of nuclear power at a lower than hydro power cost and, if so, what is the result of any such study or survey?
Answer: No such study has been undertaken by the government of Canada. The government has not been a party to any negotiations which may be going on in respect of the disposal of power developed at Hamilton falls, Labrador, nor is it aware of the precise power and transmission costs which may apply to that development. The government, of course, is keeping in close touch with the trends in the cost of power from nuclear sources.


TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY, NOVA SCOTIA
Mr. Armstrong: 1.	Has the government of Canada agreed to a route for the trans-Canada highway between Antigonish and Sutherlands river, Nova Scotia and, if so, is the highway to pass through Kenzieville?
2.	What work is to be done on this section in 1964-65?
3.	What is the estimated cost of the work to be done in the present fiscal year?
4.	When will tenders be called?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. Yes, for those sections from Antigonish to James River and from the

vicinity of Broadway to Sutherlands River. No information is yet available in regard to the location in the vicinity of Kenzieville.
2.	Detailed information on the complete provincial programming of its 1964-65 construction program has not been received to date. Present approvals include the grading and gravelling of 5.1 miles from Antigonish town line to James River, and similar work on 6.9 miles from Broadway to French River. Contracts for this work have been awarded.
3.	The estimated cost of work covered by contracts awarded is $1,485,000. This amount will increase in the event that provincial planning includes additional work on this section of the highway.
4.	The province proposes to call early tenders for the construction of a bridge over the French river. Details have not been received from the province on the timing of other projects between Antigonish and Sutherlands River.


TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY BYPASS, NOVA SCOTIA
Mr. Armstrong: What was the cost of work done in 1963-64 on the bypass on the trans-Canada highway near Antigonish, Nova Scotia, and how much of this amount was paid by the government of Canada?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: The cost of work on the Antigonish bypass during 1963-64, shareable under the trans-Canada highway agreement, for which claims have been presented by the province of Nova Scotia totalled $161,444.49. Payments by Canada on this account totalled $110,811.40.


RECEIPTS FOR CHARITABLE DONATIONS, QUEBEC
Mr. Laprise: 1.	Were income tax returns accompanied by receipts for charitable donations, for the years 1961-62, examined more methodically in the case of one province in particular, or were they treated the same for all parts of the country?
2.	(a) What percentage of receipts for charitable
donations not exceeding 10 per cent of a taxpayer's gross income were accepted or rejected for the years 1961-62	(b) what were the percentages (for receipts accepted and rejected) for the province of Quebec in the years 1961-62?
3.	Is it present federal government policy to make any receipt for charitable donations in excess of $150 the object of special scrutiny if it comes from the province of Quebec?


Mr. Mcllraiih:: 1. No, they were treated the same for all parts of the country.
2.	The department does not keep statistics showing the percentage of charitable donations accepted or rejected.
3.	No.


POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION, ST. JEAN PORT JOLI, QUE.
Mr. Ricard: With respect to the construction of the post office at St. Jean Port Joli (a) how many tenders
Questions
for the sale of land were received by the Department of Public Works (b) what was the price bid in each case (c) were tenders called for the construction of this building and, if so, on what date can work be expected to start?

Answer: (a) The department has received one tender.
(b)	$5,000.
(c)	No.


POST OFFICE REVENUE, QUEBEC
Mr. Ricard: What was the revenue of each of the following post offices during the last fiscal year (a) Baie des Sables (b) Pont Rouge (c) St. Agapit (d) St. Jean de Dieu (e) Luceville (f) St. Croix (g) Hebertville Station (h) L'Epiphanie (i) Roxboro
(j)	St. Francois du Lac (k) Grandes Bergeronnes (1) Isle Verte (m) St. Timothee (n) St. Alexis des Monts (o) Lavaltrie (p) Chambly (q) St. Prime (r) Albanel (s) Cap St. Ignace (t) Beauce-ville East (u) Rawdon (c) St. Zacharie?

Answer: The revenue for the fiscal year 1963-64 is not yet available. The following is the revenue for 1962-63:
(a) Baie des Sables, $3,833.62; (b) Pont Rouge, $10,056.05; (c) St. Agapit, $7,473.88;
(d)	St. Jean de Dieu, $7,319.45; (e) Luceville, $5,625.86; (f) St. Croix, $11,331.73; (g) Hebertville Station, $3,844.89;	(h) L'Epiphanie,
$10,294.37; (i) *St. Genevieve (now Roxboro), $84,782.17; (j) St. Francois du Lac, $3,349.78;
(k)	Grandes Bergeronnes, $4,579.16; (1) Isle Verte, $5,993.87; (m) St. Timothee, $5,546.28; (n) St. Alexis des Monts, $4,058.51; (o) Lavaltrie, $4,040.03; (p) Chambly, $29,298.15; (q) St. Prime, $3,911.89; (r) Albanel, $4,634.99; (s) Cap St. Ignace, $15,432.40; (t) Beauceville East, $23,404.24; (u) Rawdon, $22,176.82; (v) St. Zacharie, $8,499.84.
*On July 29, 1963, the post office at St. Genevieve was closed and a new post office was opened at Roxboro.


REPAIRS TO DOCK, KEMPENFELT BAY, ONT.
Mr. Madill: 1.	Has the government dock, 14 line, township of Innisfil, county of Simcoe (Kempenfelt bay, lake Simcoe) been inspected during the fiscal year 1963-64 by the Department of Public Works?
2.	What was the condition of this dock?
3.	What improvements were recommended?
4.	What amount of money has been allotted for the needed improvement and repair?
5.	When can we expect needed repairs to commence?
6.	Does the government fully accept responsibility to individuals who are injured while using these facilities if the needed repairs are not done in 1964?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. Yes, in July, 1963.
2.	Good.
3.	None.

Questions
4.	Nil.
5.	A further inspection will be carried out to determine if repairs are now needed.
6.	The government accepts its responsibility as established by law in respect to the maintenance of its properties.


HEALTH INSURANCE V. PENSION PLAN, QUE.
Mr. Rondeau: Does the Prime Minister approve a statement to the effect that a health insurance program is more important for the province of Quebec than a pension plan?


Mr. Davis:: This question was directed to the Prime Minister on March 24, 1964, and Mr. Pearson's answer will be found at page 1401 of Hansard of that date.


* REGULATIONS RESPECTING BABY SEAL SLAUGHTER
Mr. Mather: What steps are being taken to provide regulations which will put an end to the present slaughter of baby seals and to save the seal population from destruction?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: As I stated in the house on March 26, page 1495 of Hansard, the whole matter of sealing operations on the Atlantic coast is under serious consideration and it is expected that before the opening of the 1965 sealing season more restrictive regulations will be in effect.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DISQUALIFICATIONS, OWEN SOUND AND WALKERTON, ONT.
Mr. Loney: What was the number of disqualifications under section 54 (2a) of the Unemployment Insurance Act for each month during the year 1963 in the area administered by the (a) national employment office, Owen Sound, Ontario, and (b) national employment office, Walkerton, Ontario?


Mr. MacEachen:: The disqualifications under section 54(2a) were as follows:
1963 (a)	Owen Sound	(b) WalkertonJanuary	40	36February	47	31March	36	24April	34	25May	41	31June	30	21July	29	12August	44	12September	32	14October	42	19November	29	22December	49	24Total	453	271



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


SASKATCHEWAN


Mr. Cadieu (Meadow: Lake):
1.	How many radar stations in the mid-Canada line have been or are to be abandoned in Saskatchewan?
2.	What are the locations of these stations?
3.	At which of these stations have the radar towers been destroyed or dismantled?
4.	Was the government of Saskatchewan notified of the decision to abandon these stations and, if so, on what date?
5.	Was the C.B.C. notified of the decision to abandon these stations and, if so, on what date was the government of Saskatchewan, the C.B.C. or any other body given an opportunity to acquire the radar towers at these stations?
6.	When was each tower erected and at what cost?



NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL BUDGETS

Mr. Slogan: 1.	What has been the budget of N.R.C. for each of the last ten years?
2.	How much money in each of these years has been spent on medical research?
3.	How much of this money has been spent on dental research and what dental research projects have been supported?
Return tabled.



MID-CANADA STATIONS CLOSED, MANITOBA

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 477
Mr. Simpson:: 1.	On what date was active consideration of the closing of mid-Canada radar stations in the province of Manitoba commenced?
2.	How many intermediate or Doppler sites in connection with the mid-Canada line were closed down in the province of Manitoba?
3.	Was the C.B.C. notified of the decision that the Department of National Defence had no further use for the towers at these intermediate sites and, if so, on what date?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 30-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Transport or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
George Roy McWilliam: In regard to motion No. 45, since there is no correspondence in connection with this motion probably the hon. member would like to withdraw it.


Mr. Speaker:: This is motion No. 30.


Mr. Favreau:: Mr. Speaker, I must advise the hon. member for Megantic that there is no correspondence as far as the Department

of Transport is concerned. Therefore, I wonder whether the hon. member wishes to maintain or to withdraw his motion.


Mr. Langlois:: Mr. Speaker, would it be possible to adopt motions Nos. 30 to 52 inclusive, on the understanding that the motions relating to departments for which no correspondence is tabled will be withdrawn?


Mr. Speaker:: We must deal with motion No. 30. I understand from the minister that there is no correspondence. Does the hon. member wish to withdraw the motion?


Raymond Langlois: If there is no correspondence I will withdraw the motion.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND DEFENCE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 31-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of National Defence or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, there has been no correspondence received by the Minister of National Defence.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 32-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between the Minister of Justice or the deputy minister or any officials of his department and maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Quebec, since March I, 1963.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 33-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the President of the Privy Council or any officials of his secretariat, since March 1, 1963.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 34-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert
Motions for Papers
Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Associate Minister of National Defence, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, before the motion is put, I must point out that no correspondence has been received from Maitre Lessard by the Associate Minister of National Defence.


Mr. Gregoire:: Received or sent?


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Speaker, did I hear the minister to say that no correspondence was received or sent?


Guy Favreau: No correspondence in the sense of the motion.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.
CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO Motion No. 35-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister without Portfolio, since March 1, 1963.


Mr. Dupuis:: There has been no correspondence.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND SOLICITOR GENERAL

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 36-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondnce, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Solicitor General, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Can this motion stand, in view of the absence of the Solicitor General?


Raymond Langlois: Agreed.
Motion stands.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND HEALTH AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 37-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of National Health and Welfare or the deputy ministers or any officials of that department, since March 1, 1963.
[Stage Direction]
notions for Papers
[Translation}
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, I am told that an answer to this motion would entail extensive research in at least 100,000 files. Such being the case, the hon. member might perhaps agree to let his motion stand, let us say for a week, so that it could be discussed with the minister concerned, namely the Minister of National Health and Welfare, with a view of restricting, if possible, the scope on the purpose of the motion.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Speaker, I agree to the conditions and suggestion stated by the minister.
Motion stands.
[Text}



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND AGRICULTURE MINISTER

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 38-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Agriculture or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March I, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, there is no correspondence.


Mr. Beer:: There is no correspondence in connection with this motion.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND SECRETARY OF STATE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 39-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Secretary of State or the under secretary or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Maurice Lamontagne: Mr. Speaker, there is no correspondence.


Raymond Langlois: As for notice of motion No. 39, would there not be any correspondence?


Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Secretary of State has stated there was no correspondence exchanged.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND TRADE AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 40-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other 
documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Trade and Commerce or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: There was no exchange of correspondence either between the person referred to in the motion and the Minister of Trade and Commerce.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND MINES AND TECHNICAL SURVEYS DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 41-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys or the deputy minister or any officials of his department since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, again, there was no correspondence exchanged between the person mentioned in the motion and the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 42-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: One comment to make, Mr. Speaker. No correspondence was exchanged between the person concerned and the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND NATIONAL REVENUE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 43-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of National Revenue or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1. 1963.
George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, with regard to notice of motion No. 43, there is no such correspondence in the head office of the Department of National Revenue; but since the person referred to is a practising lawyer it is conceivable that there could be correspondence in the district tax office. However, 1 would point out in that connection that if there is any such correspondence, if it relates to individual tax returns it is not producible under the law; it is required to be kept confidential.


Mr. Speaker:: Then the motion should be withdrawn.


Raymond Langlois: I will accept it, subject to the reservation stated by the minister, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Did I understand the hon. member for Megantic to say that he would accept the motion under reservation? Because the Chair expressed the opinion that it should be withdrawn.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Speaker, according to the statement of the minister, if there is any correspondence at the local taxation office relating to private taxation forms or papers, I am not entitled to have that. I agree with that. If there is any other correspondence I would like to have it. If there is not any, I will withdraw the motion.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the said motion, subject to the reservation stated by the minister?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 44-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Labour, or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, no correspondence was exchanged between the person mentioned in the motion and the Minister of Labour.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 45-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert
Motions for Papers
Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Public Works or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Same answer in the case of the Minister of Public Works.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND FISHERIES DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 46-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Fisheries or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Since the information requested would require a great deal of research in departmental files, could I suggest, Mr. Speaker, for the reason mentioned earlier, that the hon. member's motion stand for another week, in order that the matter may be discussed with the Minister of Fisheries?

Motion stands.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND VETERANS AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 47-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Veterans Affairs or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: I would like to make the same suggestion in regard to this motion, on behalf of the Minister of Veterans Affairs.

Motion stands.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND DEFENCE PRODUCTION DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 48-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Defence Production or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, there was no correspondence.

Motions for Papers

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 49-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, there was no correspondence.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND FORESTRY DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 50-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Forestry or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: There was no exchange of correspondence with the forestry department. [Text]
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND FINANCE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 51-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Minister of Finance or the deputy minister or any officials of his department, since March 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Same answer:	No correspondence with the finance department. [Text]
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LUC-GILBERT LESSARD AND EXTERNAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 52-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or other documents exchanged between maitre Luc-Gilbert Lessard, of Black Lake, Megantic county, and the Secretary of State for External Affairs or any officials of his department, since March t, 1963.
['Subject to the reservation expressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the said motion?']
Guy Favreau: I give the same answer on behalf of the Secretary of State for External Affairs: No exchange of correspondence.

Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 60-Mr. Howard:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all applications for, and inquiries relating to the purchase, lease or rental of Indian reserve lands in the Bums lake Indian agency since January 1, 1963.
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, may I suggest that the hon. member for Skeena allow this motion to stand, in view of the absence of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.


Mr. Howard:: Agreed.
Motion stands.


CORRESPONDENCE RESPECTING
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 69-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams or documents exchanged between the Prime Minister or any minister of the government and any universities of the province of Quebec, regarding grants between December 1962 and March 1, 1964.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 78-Mr. Nielsen:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of the representative list and/or representative lists of suppliers (now in use) as defined by paragraph 2	(e) (ii) of the government contracts
regulations being P.C. 1954-1971 dated December 16, 1954 from each department of the government.
George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, for reasons I have explained to the hon. member personally, I understand he is agreeable to standing these motions appearing in his name.


Mr. Nielsen:: That is correct, Mr. Speaker.
Motion stands.


REPORT UNDER GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS REGULATIONS
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 79-Mr. Nielsen:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of any report made to the governor in council or to the treasury board (since April 8, 1963) pursuant to paragraph 3 (4) of the government contracts regulations being P.C. 1954-1971 dated December 16, 1954.
He said:	Mr. Speaker, in view of my
discussions with the minister this motion as

well as Nos. 80, 81 and 84 can stand. I suggested that perhaps Nos. 88 and 89 might be combined with No. 84, if the minister wishes to hasten matters that way.
Mr. Speaker:: Motions Nos. 79, 80, 81 and 84 stand.
Motions stand.


R.C.M.P. SPACE IN MUNICIPAL BUILDING
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 86-Mr. Howard:
That an order of the house do Issue for a copy of all observations and reports concerning space or the location thereof for the R.C.M. Police as referred to in the answer given to question No. 300 of the present session of parliament.
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, could I ask the hon. member for Skeena whether he would be patient with me for one more week. I know he had the kindness to stand the motion last week, but it has not yet been possible for me to get this information. However, I am sure I can deal with this matter next week.


Frank Howard: We are full of patience today, Mr. Speaker.
Motion stands.


MAIL ROUTE CONTRACT, RIVER JOHN, N.S.
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 91-Mr. MacEwan:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, telegrams or other documents exchanged between the government and any agency or branch thereof, and any other person, group or organization, regarding the R.R. 1 River John, Pictou county, Nova Scotia, mail route contract.
John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, I think the third last word in the second line of this motion should be "or" instead of "and". If that substitution is made the motion is acceptable.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservation expressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the said motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Mr. Robert C. Coates (Cumberland):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. Question No. 5 standing on the order paper in my name is dated February 18. It relates to information which I endeavoured to obtain from the government regarding the construction of the federal penal institution at Springhill, Nova Scotia. I have in my hand a release appearing in the Halifax Chronic le-Herald of April 1, 1964 which reads as follows:
Inquiries of the Ministry
Tenders on construction of the new young offenders institution at Springhill will be called by mid-April and the federal government expects to award the contract by the end of April, for a construction start early in May, labour minister MacEachen said Tuesday.
Mr. MacEachen, Nova Scotia's representative in the federal cabinet, also told the Chronicle-Herald that a $254,590 contract for provision of high temperature water generators and auxiliary equipment at the institution had been awarded to Dominion Bridge Company of Montreal.
The content of that press release, Mr. Speaker, is the information I seek in my question which is on the order paper. Yet the government has been willing to provide the information to the Minister of Labour and to disregard my rights as a member of this house.



MR. RICARD    REQUEST FOR ANSWER TO QUESTION ON ORDER PAPER

['I thank the hon. member for having put his question in language that I can understand. The question was so simple that the response is yes.']
Hon. Theogene Ricard (SI. Hyacinlhe-Bagot):: Mr. Speaker, I have not yet received a reply to the starred question I put on the order paper on February 20 concerning the salary increase of the C.B.C. president.
The other day I asked the Secretary of State if he could answer the question. It seems to me that it should not take so long to get information justifying the salary increase from $20,000 to $40,000 a year which was granted to the president of the C.B.C.
I should be most happy if the Secretary of State would provide a reply to that question today.


Maurice Lamontagne: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if that will be possible, but I will get in touch with the C.B.C. immediately to satisfy the hon. member.



[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Is he in a position to give a report regarding the incident that took place yesterday in Cyprus in which members of the Canadian contingent of the United Nations force was involved? At the same time, is he now in a position to give the house further information regarding the directives to the force and the circumstances under which the force may act when its freedom is interfered with?

Inquiries of the Ministry


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, with regard to the last part of the question, the position is no different from what it was last week, when I said that it was not in the interests of the force and of the assignment given to the force to give the directives. This was the position taken yesterday in the British House of Commons by Mr. Sandys when he indicated that the matter was one that rested with the secretary general and pointed out, as I pointed out last week, that directives to armed forces as such are never given out by any authority. Mr. Sandys said:
Since recent incidents have caused some anxiety I think it right to inform the house that we are satisfied that the directions under which the United Nations troops have been operating give them adequate authority to use such force as may be absolutely necessary for self defence and to enable them to discharge their mission. The secretary general has assured us that he recognizes that the force must have the powers necessary to fulfil its task.
With regard to the first part of the right hon. member's question, General Gyani who is in charge of the force has made representations respecting this matter to the government of Cyprus.


John George Diefenbaker: What attitude has the Canadian government taken and what representations has it made regarding Canadians being interfered with as they were?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I may say to my
right hon. friend that Canada is not holding itself aloof from developments which could have a bearing on the outcome of the problem in Cyprus. We have a high commissioner accredited to the government of Cyprus and he is in continuous contact with the Cypriot authorities. Our permanent mission to the United Nations is similarly in constant contact with the secretary general and the United Nations officials directing the United Nations peace keeping operation. We are availing ourselves of these proper channels for the expression of our views on such matters as freedom of movement for the United Nations force which was guaranteed by the Cypriot government in the status of forces agreement. I tabled yesterday copies of that agreement which clearly is not yet fully effective.
I might say that the Canadian and British forces in Cyprus deserve the highest commendation for the restraint they have shown in the trying circumstances which have arisen when freedom of movement has been temporarily denied to them. I am satisfied that the operations of the peace keeping force have reduced considerably the very great potential danger which existed on that island a few weeks ago and which has not completely disappeared.


John George Diefenbaker: After all that verbiage will the minister now answer the question? Has the Canadian government made a protest with regard to the interference by Cypriots with that portion of the Canadian force that was interfered with yesterday?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that my method of response does not satisfy the right hon. gentleman. It is not my fault if I do not possess his great capacity for lucid expression, but I cannot add anything to what I have said.


John George Diefenbaker: Loose expression.


Mr. W. B. Nesbiti (Oxford):: Mr. Speaker, would the Secretary of State for External Affairs undertake to request the secretary general of the United Nations to release and publish the directives that were given to the troops, inasmuch as it is reported in the Globe and Mail this morning that in the parliament of the United Kingdom yesterday Mr. Sandys agreed to do this?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, the views of Canada with regard to the directives were discussed by me with the secretary general about 10 days ago. With respect to the action taken by Mr. Sandys I can say that there is consultation on this point, but I am convinced from the information available to me now that the course taken by the secretary general in the circumstances is the right course; it is in the interests of fulfilling the assignment for which the international police force was established.
So far as the hon. member's question is concerned, I suggest that he might look at the status of forces agreement tabled yesterday; I think that agreement would perhaps give him some satisfaction.


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquiflam):: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the situation in Cyprus has been further complicated by the repudiation by President Makarios of the treaty with Turkey, may I ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs if he himself, directly or through the secretary general, will make representations to Archbishop Makarios to make it perfectly clear that this parliament authorized Canadian forces as part of the United Nations force to maintain peace in Cyprus but not to protect the government of Cyprus against the consequences of its unilateral repudiation of an existing treaty?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, the British government, the government of Turkey and the government of Greece are parties to the 1960 agreement. I would call my hon. friend's attention to the attitude taken by the British government in this matter; that government would have a treaty qualification to

complain about any act that would involve the abrogation of treaty rights. The course this government must follow, based on the information before us, must be dictated by our view of the effect this will have on the fulfilment of the mission for which the force was established. Our representative in Nicosia is in contact with the government of Cyprus, and with the head of that government, Archbishop Makarios. In my judgment it is not in the public interest for me to say anything further at this time.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A further supplementary
question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that the foreign minister of Turkey has made it clear that any interference with the small Turkish force in Cyprus will lead to hostilities, I hope that the Secretary of State for External Affairs will make it very clear to the president of Cyprus that Canada would take a very dim view of having Canadian forces caught in a series of hostilities brought about by actions of the government of Cyprus.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend may well be assured that his point of view as expressed now and the point of view of the Canadian government, are not basically different.


Mr. G. W. Baldwin (Peace River):: I have a question for the Secretary of State for External Affairs which I should have asked earlier, because it is supplementary to those asked about the Cyprus situation. However, I wanted to make quite sure it was framed in such a way that the hon. gentleman would understand it. Does the government, with full knowledge of the facts, or with its knowledge of the facts, after assessing the detail of the terminology of the directives from the secretary general, accept responsibility for those directives being satisfactory in the exigencies of the situation?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I thank the hon. member for having put his question in language that I can understand. The question was so simple that the response is yes.



LABOUR RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Marcel Lessard (Lake St. John):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour.
Has the minister received from the directors of the great lakes maritime union a telegram in which they protest strongly against the
Inquiries of the Ministry appointment of Mr. McLaughlin as president of that organization and, if so, what does he intend to do about it?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, I have received the telegram, and I intend to reply to it.


Mr. A. B. Patterson (Fraser Valley):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question supplementary to the one directed by my colleague the hon. member for Lake St. John to the Minister of Labour, and ask whether he considers the objections raised in the telegram from the S.I.U. to be valid objections; and could he indicate what his response is going to be to this telegram?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, the telegram to which the previous question referred was not from the S.I.U., that is, the telegram I looked at this morning. The telegram I looked at was not in my judgment a fully accurate picture of the facts, and I would like to point that out in my reply.


Alexander Bell Patterson: May I say that this telegram is from the S.I.U. members of the rights and welfare committee.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I shall check on that particular telegram, which to my knowledge I have not received yet.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Quebec West.


Mr. Lucien Plourde (Quebec West):: Mr. Speaker, the question I wanted to put has already been answered.



PENSIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the report in this afternoon's Ottawa Citizen of the speech made to the Canadian club in Toronto today by Premier Robarts, in which he is reported to have all but announced the Ontario government's intention to stay out of the Canada pension plan, can the Prime Minister say whether this differs from the understanding he had at the Quebec conference? Could he also say whether the federal government is still doing its best to persuade Ontario to stay in the Canada pension plan?



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
Inquiries of the Ministry
Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I have not had an opportunity of reading this report, let alone the text of what the premier of Ontario said. I will be very interested in getting the text of what he said and making any appropriate comments after I have studied it.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS SUGGESTED ESTABLISHMENT OF SECRETARIAT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Heward Graffiey (Brome-Missisquoi):: I should like to direct my question to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister advise whether he intends that the proposed committee to study federal-provincial tax questions and priorities be set up as a permanent body for federal-provincial relations?


Lester Bowles Pearson: The question of a permanent body of tt^t kind was not discussed at Quebec. It was not considered during our discussion as a permanent body.


William Heward Grafftey: May I ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Did the federal government initiate any discussions at all relating to the establishment of a permanent secretariat for federal-provincial affairs at the conference in Quebec last week?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Yes, we put the matter on the agenda and initiated discussion. The means of liaison between federal and provincial governments is a matter of considerable importance in which my hon. friend has already expressed a very deep interest. It is a very significant question. However, the general viewpoint expressed by the provinces was that it was more important at the moment to develop machinery for liaison between the governments inside each government rather than set up a joint liaison committee in Ottawa at this time. It was agreed, although this matter will be considered again, to see how this kind of liaison works before considering setting up a permanent joint liaison committee.


Hon. Paul Mariineau (Ponfiac-Temiscamin-gue):: In so far as this liaison committee is concerned, has the Prime Minister heard from Premier Lesage since last week as to whether or not he will join it?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Premier Lesage at the conference called attention to the fact that he had been the first to act, and there is already a highly developed piece of machinery in his government for that purpose. We already knew about that.

On the orders of the day:


Hon. Marcel Lambert (Edmonton West):: I should like to ask the Minister of Justice if he is able to inform the house of the results of the research of the law officers of the crown on the orders in council affecting the respective powers of the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of Forestry?


Guy Favreau: I am not yet in a position to advise the house as to these matters which I have undertaken to consider.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Is the minister able to tell us when he may be able to give us that opinion?


Guy Favreau: As soon as I have occasion to receive a report from my officers and discuss it with them, and then take the responsibility for it.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Will that be next year?



REQUEST FOR ANNOUNCEMENT OF DAIRY PRODUCTS SUPPORT PROGRAM

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Clement Vincent (Nicolel-Yamaska):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Could he tell the house what the government intends to do to support dairy products prices, under the Agricultural Prices Support Act, for the year beginning May 1, 1964?


Hon. Harry W. Hays (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, we have to make the dairy announcement soon because the dairy year starts on May 1. We hope to be able to do this in the next week or so. We were delighted with last year's policy whereby dairy prices were higher than they had been for a number of years. We were able to level off production and consumption of butter, and we hope to be bringing in a policy that will be even better for 1964.


Mr. Vinceni:: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is the minister aware that this policy was announced on March 22, 1962?


Harry William Hays: I would like to correct that. The dairy policy is announced just before May 1. We announced it in plenty of time last year, and it did work.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr.  R. Gordon L. Fairweather@Royal: wonder if the Minister of Justice would undertake to make an immediate study of the allegations made by a retired sergeant of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, who was reported in the Montreal Gazette today as saying that he was appalled at the degree to which wire tapping is used by the police in Canada.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg.


Mr. Fairweather:: May I expect an answer?


Mr. Speaker:: I was going to suggest that the question would be a proper one for the order paper, and I noticed that the minister seemed to agree since he did not rise to answer.


Guy Favreau: I did not think it was a question but rather a suggestion that I should look into the matter. If that is a question, my answer is yes.



ONTARIO


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Reid Scott (Danforlh):: I have a question for the Minister of Justice. Has the government received representations from the government of Ontario, or from anybody on its behalf, for amendments to the Criminal Code or any other legislative changes arising out of the Ontario police commission report on organized gambling in Ontario? If so, what were the representations and what was the nature of the government's response?


Mr. Speaker:: It seems to me that this is also a question for the order paper.



COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (Queens-Lunenburg):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. In the Halifax Chronicle-Herald under date of April 7, 1964 there is an article reporting that the minister made a statement in Bridgetown, Barbados to the effect that the Canadian government had announced a big increase in international aid and that some of this aid would be directed toward the British Caribbean.
Inquiries of the Ministry
In view of the importance to the maritime provinces of increasing trade between our area and the West Indies, would the minister now tell the house the amount and type of aid planned by his government for the British Caribbean?


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I know the hon. gentleman does not expect me to make any statement outside the house that has not already been made in the house. The statement I was referring to in Barbados was one made by my colleague the Secretary of State for External Affairs.



NATURAL RESOURCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: wish to address a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. Before doing so, I cannot resist saying that never have I seen so much colour produce so little glamour.
In view of the fact that studies in the United States have proven that pesticides are much danger to fish life in streams, has the government received any complaints along similar lines in Canada? If so, what action does he intend to take?


Hon. Arthur Laing (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: May I first of all thank the hon. member for his compliments on the celebration that we, in his old party, are enjoying today. I might say, Mr. Speaker, that the Liberal party in British Columbia is still waiting for the resignation of the one-time vice president of the Liberal association of that province.
I want to thank the hon. member for having asked this question. I am quite sure that most Canadians are impressed by the report of the United States government in respect of losses that have occurred as a result of pesticides, particularly in water pollution. I am quite certain that those members of this house who were on the splendid committee last year investigating this matter will realize that many of the losses sustained in the United States are duplicated in this country. I am writing to the resource ministers of the various provinces suggesting that pollution of water, soil and air might well be a subject for discussion at the forthcoming resource ministers' conference to be held in Prince Edward Island in June.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Glad to hear it.

Inquiries of the Ministry PUBLICATIONS
EXEMPTION FROM SALES TAX OF "READER'S DIGEST" AND "time"
On the orders of the day:


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Will the Minister of Finance advise the house whether he intends to remove the so-called exempt status for two magazines, Time and Reader's Digest, in the light of reports of growing pressure within government ranks to have this exemption lifted?



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a question of the Minister of Labour Is it his intention to consider prolonging the winter works program after April 30, especially in the designated areas which are suffering so much from unemployment?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, I shall be glad to consider this proposal.



COMBINES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. Could he advise whether the officers of his department under the Combines Investigation Act are looking into the implications of the price fixing charges in the United States which might involve Canadian subsidiaries of the said companies and their activities in Canada?


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



BRITISH COLUMBIA-SALE OF MEAT PACKING COMPANY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, on March 5 I directed a question to the Minister of Justice concerning a specific company, Pacific Meat Co. Ltd. on the west coast, the sale of that company to another company, and the restrictive covenant in that agreement of sale. The question was taken as notice by the parliamentary secretary, and inasmuch as a bit more than a month has elapsed, I wonder if the minister could indicate whether he has an answer to the
[Mr. HerridgeJ
question or, if it has been answered, where I might find it in Hansard.


Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, I will undertake to answer that tomorrow.



NORTHERN AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Erik Nielsen: Mr. Speaker, I I have a question for the Prime Minister. Can he inform the house whether the government has now abandoned its idea of sloughing off its jurisdiction with regard to Eskimos in nouveau Quebec?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker, that was never the intention.


Erik Nielsen: As a supplementary question, can the Prime Minister say when it is the intention of the government to set up the commission that was announced would be set up last May 4 by his minister of northern affairs?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I shall have to take that as notice.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I would direct a question to the Minister of Veterans Affairs which arises out of a telegram and another message from veterans, asking whether a decision has been made by the government to turn over the Colonel Belcher hospital in Calgary to the municipal authorities. Is there any further information in this connection, or is the matter still up in the air?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: Mr. Speaker, the position with respect to the Colonel Belcher hospital is the same as I indicated the other day, that negotiations are going on. Talks are being held and we are in the process, as I understand from checking it yesterday, of nearing a point where perhaps some agreement might be specifically talked about. I might be a day or so behind in my information, because I have not the full information in front of me, but there is no decision on it as yet.


John George Diefenbaker: Does the minister mean that negotiations are going on between the municipal authorities and the Department of Veterans Affairs to turn the hospital over to the municipal authorities?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: Talks are going on between the province of Alberta and the department with reference to the Colonel Belcher hospital.


John George Diefenbaker: Are the veterans being consulted or have they been consulted in recent days, and are they agreeable to this?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: I have not discussed this with the veterans in recent days, but the veterans were present at the original discussions. Until we have a complete proposal to talk about we do not see any point in discussing it with them at this time.
Mr. Speaker, while I am on my feet may I answer some questions that were asked the other day, one I believe by the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria with reference to Camp Hill hospital. I have the reply that I indicated then, that we have received no complaints in the department.
However, following the hon. gentleman's question there was a question by the hon. member for Cape Breton South, and I can state that the occupancy during the course of 1963 in Camp Hill hospital of patients falling under treatment sections 19 to 21 V.T.R., that is the military people, people coming under the Canadian Shipping Act and the R.C.M.P., was on the average 11 beds. No entitled veteran has been denied admission to Camp Hill hospital as a result of this activity.


Mr. D. V. Pugh (Okanagan Boundary):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Veterans Affairs with regard to veterans hospitals and his answers to the Leader of the Opposition concerning the Colonel Belcher hospital in Calgary. Do the talks with the government of Alberta mean that the government here in Ottawa now has the intention of going ahead and turning the care of these veterans over to civil or provincial authorities?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: I did not get the last part of that question, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if the hon. member would repeat it.


David Vaughan Pugh: Is it the intention of this government to turn over the veterans hospitals to the provincial authorities? Is the Colonel Belcher hospital discussion a preliminary, or a pilot? Is it a starter, or the first one, and is the same thing to apply to all veterans hospitals throughout Canada?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: As to the last part of the question, it would be impossible for me to generalize along those lines. As to the first part, if we can be satisfied that we shall be given the necessary safeguards and guarantees so that veterans' rights will definitely be protected, it is our intention to proceed with it.


Mr. W. H. A. Thomas (Middlesex Wesi):: I wish to direct a supplementary question to
Inquiries of the Ministry the Prime Minister. On March 30, in answer to a question regarding these hospitals the right hon. gentleman answered as follows:
I think it would be the intention, Mr. Speaker, that the hospitals be left in the control of the department.
I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether this answer also applies to the Colonel Belcher hospital in Calgary?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: The question of control, surely, involves two things. I do not like to discuss matters which are under negotiation, but the probability is that the buildings will remain under the control of the department. In the second place, we shall certainly remain in control when it comes to deciding who shall be admitted to hospital. We shall decide whether or not a veteran is admissible; that is not to be left in the hands of any civil authority, as was made clear the other day.


Gerald William Baldwin: Are you not a civil authority?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: In that sense certainly we shall retain control.



REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF ALLOWANCES FOR CHILDREN

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Roger-Joseph Teillet: Mr. Speaker, I was asked another question by the hon. member for Colchester-Hants, with reference to the extension of family allowances. I should like to report to the hon. member that all these sections of the veterans charter-there are three acts, I believe-make it possible for allowances to be continued beyond the ages of 16 and 17 in any case, based on the academic advance made, up to the age of 21, and in the case of children of war dead to the age of 25.



REASON FOR LOWER PRICE THIS YEAR

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mitchell William Sharp: Yesterday the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort-Tisdale asked me a question about the initial payment on barley announced by the wheat board two days ago. The average final payment on barley of the 1962 crop was 18.2 cents per bushel compared with 30.2 cents per bushel for the 1961 crop, or 12 cents per bushel lower.
There are two reasons for this decline. First, the carrying charges applicable to the pool account just closed were 4 cents per bushel higher than the carrying charges applicable to the 1961-62 pool account. Second, the average market price realized by the Canadian wheat board for barley sold for the account of the 1962-63 pool was 8 cents

Inquiries of the Ministry per bushel less than the average market price realized lor barley delivered to the 1961-62 pool.
The reason lor the increase in the carrying charges is to be lound in the lact that producer deliveries were considerably higher in 1962-63, at the figure ol 77.6 million bushels, than in 1961-62, with a figure ol 56.4 million bushels, and also because large export sales were made relatively early in the 1961 crop year, whereas a strong demand lor the barley delivered to the 1962-63 pool account did not develop until the fall of 1963.
The reason lor the decreased average market price for barley in the 1962-63 pool was intensified competition for export feed grain markets and a general decline in world feed grain prices.
The hon. member said farmers would be interested in this information as an indication of what they should now be seeding. May I just say that, speaking generally, I am reasonably optimistic about the future with respect to feed grain markets, particularly here in Canada, and I foresee the need for a gradually expanding acreage for the production of barley in the years ahead.


Mr. Reynold Rapp (Humboldi-Melforf-Tis-dale):: Would the hon. gentleman's statement apply to other feed grains such as oats? Can farmers take it that the lower price received for barley is not an indication that there is a smaller demand on the commercial market for barley and other feed grains?


Mitchell William Sharp: I anticipate there will be a very active demand for barley and feed grains generally in the coming year.


Mr. J. H. Horner (Acadia):: I wonder if the minister would care to comment, on a note of optimism or pessimism, with regard to prospects for the marketing of wheat in the coming year.


Mitchell William Sharp: No, Mr. Speaker.



PUBLIC WORKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. H. Aiken (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: I have a question for the Prime Minister. Perhaps the right hon. gentleman would permit me to say I am interested to see that he and his party are celebrating today the plight of the unemployment insurance fund.


Some hon. Members:: In the red.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: In the absence of the Minister of Public Works and in connection with the question of privilege I raised yesterday concerning government consultants, I should like

to ask the Prime Minister whether he approves of consultants of the government, who are defeated candidates, trafficking in public building sites.


Lester Bowles Pearson: As far as the hon. member's preliminary remarks are concerned, I am grateful to him for giving me an opportunity to remind him and the house that when we left office the unemployment insurance fund stood at $854 million, and when we took office again the fund was broke. That I think is sufficient comment on the policies of right hon. gentlemen opposite. As far as the question itself is concerned, I can assure the hon. member we shall not follow in this matter the practices of himself and the previous government.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: On a question of privilege, perhaps I did not understand the Prime Minister's answer. I asked him whether he and his government approve of consultants trafficking in building sites. The question of privilege I raised yesterday concerned a consultant of the government who went out and purchased in his own name a building site which had already been negotiated for by the previous government, and then resold it to the government.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Of course I do not accept the facts as stated by the hon. member, but I can assure him that I do not approve of illegal trafficking of any kind.



THE CANADIAN ECONOMY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Does he intend, as it is the case for the maritime provinces, to request from the government the setting up of a development bank for the lower St. Lawrence, Gaspe peninsula and lies de la Madeleine areas, as was suggested by the Minister of Forestry (Mr. Sauve) in Mont Joli, according to a report published in be SoleUt


Lester Bowles Pearson: I have only the hon. gentleman's statement that this proposal was made by a colleague of mine, and I have to be very careful about accepting his reported statement in the press. However, I will be glad to look into it.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question concerning the Gaspe peninsula,

from the economic standpoint. Does the government intend to reconsider its decision to abandon the construction of a railroad and go on with this construction which is essential to the economic development of the Gaspe peninsula and Canada?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I am quite sure that the people of Gaspe will be very pleased indeed by the improvement in communication that is about to take place in that region under this government.



THE MINISTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerard Perron (Beauce):: Mr. Speaker, I would have a question for the Minister without Portfolio (Mr. Dupuis), but seeing that he is not yet in his seat, I shall put it to the Prime Minister.
In view of the fact that the Minister without Portfolio stated last week on television that he had a little to do with all departments, could the Prime Minister tell us exactly what are the duties of his Minister without Portfolio in each of the government departments?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. It seems to me that this question is not in order. It certainly is not properly framed-


Gilles Grégoire: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Could we not ask the Prime Minister to give just a little portfolio to his Minister without Portfolio in order to satisfy the members-a little portfolio.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. This question is not properly framed. It seems to me that at the time of the announcement of the appointment of the minister a statement was made outlining his duties.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, may I be allowed to compliment the Prime Minister and his supporters on their very colourful appearance-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: -and to say that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
20220-121i
Inquiries of the Ministry In view of the fact that this is the anniversary of the last election, and since the government has watered down nearly all its policies in the year that has transpired-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: -may I ask the Prime Minister whether he does not think that the red carnations which he and his supporters are wearing might more appropriately be replaced by pale pink carnations?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, if we had pale pink carnations we might be accused of being fellow travellers of my hon. friend.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Starr:: Well, aren't you?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, this is further evidence of the fine co-operation between those across the way and the N.D.P. There is very little difference in the colour; that is very apparent, and has been throughout the last few weeks.



SOCIAL INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerard Laprise (Chapleau):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister?
Could he tell us whether the employees of the Quebec provincial government are required to register and to have a social security card, and whether there has been an agreement in that respect with the Quebec government?


Lester Bowles Pearson: That is a very important detail of the proposed legislation that will be discussed when the bill is before the house.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Labour regarding the application forms for a social insurance number. Were these forms sent out to the province of Quebec for distribution in that province? I ask this question in view of the fact that the legislation has not yet been passed. I would also like to ask him whether he would give the assurance to the Canadian people-and it does not appear on the application-that any information provided in this application form will be maintained on a
1918	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry completely confidential basis and will not be used for any other purpose or passed over to any other department?


William Heward Grafftey: Big brother.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, the application forms for the social insurance number have been distributed to all employers in all provinces of Canada, including the province of Quebec. As I have already stated in the house, the obligation to register arises from authority under the Unemployment Insurance Act and applies to approximately 4| million persons in the insured population. The remaining persons, whom we would like to have register, are asked to come forward voluntarily and register under this plan. If they are not part of the insured population, they cannot be obliged to come forward; but it would be our wish that in view of the proposed Canada pension plan they might in registering now, avoid the duplication that would be required later on.
The information that is available in these forms will be processed and maintained in Ottawa for government purposes-


Some hon. Members:: Government?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: -including the unemployment insurance commission and the proposed Canada pension plan.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Are you going to take their fingerprints too?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, would the minister give an unequivocal answer that the information contained on the forms used in this system, which bears a strange relationship to dictatorship-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: -will not be made available in any way, directly or indirectly, to any other department?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, this system, which the hon. gentleman suggests is akin to dictatorship, is precisely the same as the system followed by the unemployment insurance commission in the six years he was prime minister.


John George Diefenbaker: No, not at all.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Precisely the same principle is involved.


John George Diefenbaker: Not at all.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Precisely the same numbering appeared on the unemployment insurance books, and the information requested in such forms has always been available to government departments.


John George Diefenbaker: Not at all.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Therefore, Mr. Speaker, to suggest that a new principle is involved is quite false.


Mr. MacEwan:: It is not false.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, the minister seems to have such difficulty answering this question. The question, repeated to him, is this: Is it clear and definite on his part and on the part of the government that any information given in these application forms will be used exclusively by the Department of Labour and will not be passed over to any other department? That is what I want to know.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend will recall that the Glassco commission made a proposal that there be a common system of government record keeping and I am saying-and this is all the responsibility I can take-that this information is to be used for the unemployment insurance system and for the Canada pension plan.


John George Diefenbaker: And nothing else?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I am not in a position to indicate at this stage what system of government record keeping will be involved in the future, but that is the present attitude of the government.


John George Diefenbaker: Oh; income tax, and so
on?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Certainly not.


John George Diefenbaker: The Prime Minister is butting in. I ask him, will he give the undertaking on behalf of the government that this information will not be made available to other departments of government? We want to know that this is not a snooping operation for the use of the government.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, the same and, I would hope, more effective precautions will be taken in this regard as were taken under the regime of the right hon. gentleman.


John George Diefenbaker: All this means is that it
is going to be used.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a supplementary question either of the Minister of Labour or the Prime Minister. Is it not a fact that the terms under which these numbers are to be given are spelled out in Bill No. C-75, which some of us have read-


William Heward Grafftey: Don't be so sanctimonious.


Stanley Howard Knowles: -terms which make clear the basis upon which these numbers are to be used, and that they are not to be used for any other purpose.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Yes, Mr. Speaker; and it is unfortunate that my right hon. friend opposite has not read that bill also; otherwise he would not have talked about dictatorship so freely as he did.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I would simply say that the government has refused to answer the question, and I again thank the hon. gentleman for his fine spirit of co-operation with the government. It is obvious they are together.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Robert Simpson: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Labour. Can the minister say whether as of today it is compulsory for each employee who comes under the regulations of the unemployment insurance commission to fill out these forms and sign them; and can he also say what is the final date for these forms being turned in?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, it is a fact, as has been the case since the Unemployment Insurance Act was passed more than 20 years ago, that the insured population are obliged to register and receive numbers. That fact has prevailed all those years and is still the case today. There is nothing new at all in principle, and my hon. friend ought to be aware of this. The program of registering and the issuing of social insurance numbers is under way now, and will continue for some weeks into the future. We hope all Canadians will come forward and register in order to ensure that this system of making social insurance benefits available in the form of insurance under the proposed Canada pension plan will operate efficiently.


Robert Simpson: A supplementary question. What I am trying to determine is whether it is the responsibility of the employee or the employer to see that these forms are filled out as quickly as possible? Because the minister said that this matter has been in the regulations of the unemployment insurance commission for some time. Under the present system each employee has a number. If an employee does not fill out a form will he automatically be given a number transferring his number in his unemployment insurance commission book to a new book under this system? Whom is the onus upon?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I regret I do not follow the question asked by my hon. friend. If he wishes to put it on the order paper I will try to answer as quickly as possible.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Robert Simpson: Let me ask one specific question. Is the responsibility of seeing that these forms are filled out on the employees or their employers?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: It is the responsibility of the employee, the insured person, to apply for and receive a number. We are in this situation asking employers to register all employees, to make the application forms available to the employees, who will then fill them out. These forms will be returned by the employers to the local unemployment insurance office. In the case of an employee who does not want to take advantage of registering through his employer under the plan, that employee is certainly free to go to the unemployment insurance office, fill out a form and register.


Raymond Langlois: A supplementary question to the Prime Minister concerning this system. Is the government considering whether this system is going to be extended to other departments than those of the unemployment insurance commission and pensions?


Lester Bowles Pearson: There is no necessity for extending this particular system for this particular purpose to any other department.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: A supplementary question to the Minister of Labour. There are a number of companies in my riding which already have a pension plan. Some of their employees have asked me about these cards, which seem to serve a dual purpose, one for the unemployment insurance commission and one for the administration of the pension plan. Will the filling in of these cards mean an automatic endorsa-tion of the Canada pension plan?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Of course not, Mr. Speaker. The idea is that normally the unemployment insurance commission would be revising and renewing its books at this time of year. The numbering system under the unemployment insurance commission was becoming obsolete. Modern data processing machinery could not be used and a more effective identification system had to be employed. For example, I understand there are 50,000 Smiths registered with the commission, 10,000 of whom have the first intial "J". It is obvious that additional information has to be acquired in order to identify each contributor properly. In light of that and in light of the proposals in the Canada pension plan it was thought desirable to combine these operations at this particular time into one single activity. There is no endorsation of anything in this application form; it will
1920	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-National Defence merely make it possible to continue the efficient operation of the unemployment insurance commission and to apply the proposals contained in the Canada pension plan.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister? Could he assure the house that these application forms do not conflict with provincial autonomy or with the jurisdiction that belongs to the provinces?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker, we would not expect to put it into effect if it was in conflict with the jurisdiction of a province, and there is no indication that it is.


Howard Russell MacEwan: A further supplementary question to the Minister of Labour. A couple of weeks ago a question was directed to him on the order paper dealing with this matter, and I should now like to ask the minister how much of the $300,000 odd which has been allocated toward the campaign to introduce these social security cards has now been expended by the Mac-laren advertising agency by way of advertising.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, if this question is placed on the order paper I am sure the hon. member will receive a full answer, but I think I can say that for the past fiscal year the total sum has not been spent, but that it will be in the months of April and May when the advertising campaign reaches its climax.



PRIVILEGE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Terry Nugent (Edmonlon-Slraihcona):: Mr. Speaker, I was not in the house yesterday, but this matter has come to my attention. As reported at page 1859 of Hansard the Minister of Justice made this remark:
I was detained here throughout last week by the hon. member for Edmonton-Strathcona.
That statement is completely false, as hon. members know. He was detained here throughout last week by his own blundering incompetence as house leader.

House again in committee of supply, Mr. Lamoureux in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE Royal Canadian Air Force-
35e. Operation and maintenance, $13,653,000.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Chairman, I have a few remarks to make on these supplementary estimates. One of the reasons the debate has been protracted for such a long time is because-


Mr. Matheson:: Because of hon. members opposite.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: If the hon. member for Leeds wishes to make some remarks he will have his opportunity-is because of the difficulty in many cases of obtaining adequate or any answers from the government. For that reason a number of members, I think even some on the government side, have found it necessary to spend some time over these estimates.
One matter about which I should like to inquire concerns the Department of National Defence and our forces in Cyprus. On a great many occasions members of this house have tried to obtain information concerning our forces in Cyprus, what they are doing there, terms and conditions of service, directives and the like.


The Chairman:: Order, please. Before the hon. member proceeds further may I bring to his attention that we are now on vote 35e which concerns the Royal Canadian Air Force, operation and maintenance. I would ask him to restrict his comments to this particular item.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Chairman, it was my understanding, and I was in the house last evening when this point was thoroughly discussed, that it was agreed long ago that on the first item of each department anyone speaking would have reasonable latitude.


Lucien Lamoureux: That is not the understanding. If the hon. member was in the house last night he will recognize that this argument was made by one hon. member and I took the liberty of disagreeing with it. My interpretation of any agreement or understanding originally arrived at is that on the first item, wherever there is an administration item for a department, there can be a general discussion within the limits of the ordinary rules of relevancy. I would feel very strongly and earnestly that this is the decision which was arrived at when we began discussion of the supplementary estimates.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: With great respect to Your Honour I would point out that this item refers to the Royal Canadian Air Force, operation and maintenance, and one of the details thereunder is travelling and removal expenses. Certainly so far as the Cyprus enterprise is concerned the Royal Canadian Air Force was used to transport some personnel there and one of the specific items here is travelling and removal expenses. With great respect, I really

fail to see how Your Honour can suggest that one is out of order in discussing the Cyprus operation under this supplementary.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, this supplementary is tor the year that is past. During that year there were no R.C.A.F. personnel in Cyprus, or who had anything to do with Cyprus. How the hon. gentleman can now bring Cyprus into the discussion of a supplementary estimate concerning the R.C.A.F. for the year that is past is very difficult to understand.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Chairman, with great respect to the Prime Minister, the Cyprus operation was commenced prior to April 1 of this year. These estimates are supplemen-taries to those of the previous fiscal year which ended on March 31 and, with all respect, I think it is quite conceivable that certainly some of the moneys in the estimates for that period would cover the Cyprus operation. I realize the government's sensitivity on the subject and the fact they do not want it discussed-


Paul Joseph James Martin: The government's sense of responsibility.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: -but with great respect I feel I should be entitled to continue. If I may return to my remarks, I am to a large degree very sympathetic to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. I have had some experience in his line of work and I realize it is not always possible-


Paul Joseph James Martin: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, may I assure my hon. friend that within the confines of what I am sure he would understand was desirable in regard to this situation, I would welcome the fullest opportunity for discussion, but certainly my hon. friend is completely out of order on this item. The force went to Cyprus only in the latter part of last month. It is true that the fiscal year ended on March 31, but the accounts for any involvement of the Canadian force in Cyprus could not possibly have been presented to treasury by this time. The hon. gentleman is so obviously out of order, Mr. Chairman, that I am sure he would not even require your suggestion that he is out of order.


David Vaughan Pugh: Mr. Chairman, may I speak to the point of order? I would ask you to cast your mind back to the early part of the year 1962. This question of order was threshed out most thoroughly at that time and if my memory serves me correctly the present Secretary of State for External Affairs was most vociferous in upholding the principle that one can speak all around the subject.


Mr. Marlin (Essex Easl):: That is not the point at issue at all. The point at issue-
Supply-National Defence


David Vaughan Pugh: Just a minute. The minister can have all the time he likes if he wishes to get to his feet again and speak, but I should like to complete my remarks. In the spring of 1962 there were 26i days taken on supplementary estimates. I refer particularly to the Department of National Defence and the fact that the discussion of its estimates went on and on. Those in the opposition at that time spoke about the future potential of weapons, how much they might cost and went into all aspects of defence policy. They spoke on everything but the actual expenditures submitted in the supplementary estimates.
If Your Honour will examine the debates of that time I suggest you cannot come to any other conclusion but that the Cyprus expedition, which we are about to discuss, is a subject that is quite germane and certainly part of this debate. It has been said that what is before us concerns expenditures of the past year and has nothing to do with the Cyprus expedition. I suggest to Your Honour that in relation to expenditures previously made it is quite proper to discuss further expenditures which may be necessary and question of whether the government is prepared to cover all expenditures in the future. Surely this is part of the discussion.
For emphasis I come back again to the early part of 1962 when those opposite at that time, took 26J days-


Lester Bowles Pearson: That is absolutely false.


David Vaughan Pugh: -to cover what normally takes one or two days. They put on the greatest filibuster that has ever been seen. We on this side are talking common sense and we wish to put our views forward on the floor of the house.


George James McIlraith: On the point of order, Mr. Chairman, no part of the Cyprus operation is covered by the estimates before the committee at the moment, and since there is no item covering it I have no information on the subject nor can I properly get it or give it. That operation is not being financed through these estimates. It is a matter that will have to come up when the new main estimates come before us. I would point out again that they have been tabled in the house and that the government is quite anxious to have them brought forward so there will be an opportunity to discuss them in committee of supply; but no part of these final supplementary estimates (E) relates to the Cyprus operation.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Chairman, with the greatest deference to the President of the Privy Council, I wish he had addressed the same sentiments to himself and his present
1922	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence colleagues on the front bench when they were over here, so far as the discussion of supplementary estimates was concerned. The experience of past years has shown that these highly commendable sentiments just did not mean a thing to the hon. gentlemen at that time; but now that they have been transported across the floor it would appear that the vice of those days has become the virtue of today.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is it not the other way around?


Lucien Lamoureux: The hon. member for Vancouver East on the point of order.


Mr. Winch:: No, Mr. Chairman, I want to speak on the supplementary estimates.


Lucien Lamoureux: If I may give the opinion of the Chair again, the only thing I can do is refer hon. members to standing order 59(2) which reads as follows:
Speeches in committee of the whole house must be strictly relevant to the item or clause under consideration.
We have before us vote 35e having to do with the Royal Canadian Air Force, operation and maintenance, $13,653,000, and the only thing I can do is to ask hon. members to cooperate with the Chair and relate their remarks to the particular resolution which is before the committee.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Chairman, I have been in the house most of the time when these supplementary estimates have been under discussion. It was my clear understanding, having also discussed the matter with a number of my colleagues and certainly having been in the house last night-Mr. Chairman, I wish these continual interruptions by the hon. member for Leeds would stop. If he wants to say anything, let him get up and say it.


John Ross Matheson: Mr. Chairman, surely there has been a decision of the Chair. Is that not the understanding of the committee?


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: That is the question I was bringing up. With regard to all the other supplementary estimates that have been discussed it is my understanding that Your Honour's decision, concurred in and applied by the deputy chairman also-this point was brought up by the hon. member for Lapointe last night-was that when the first item of any department was brought forward there would be the widest latitude in the discussion.
I will agree that probably Your Honour is technically quite correct in your ruling, but in view of what has happened in connection with the other departments I think a general discussion should be allowed. It was my understanding, and certainly that of my


colleagues, that there would be a general discussion on the first item. I do not know why. there is one rule for one department and another rule for another, or one rule for one member of this house and another rule for another.


Lucien Lamoureux: I cannot repeat too often the opinion which I have expressed before. This very point was raised last night by the hon. member for Yukon. If the hon. member for Oxford will look at the record for last night he will see that I expressed the view that the understanding that was reached by hon. members when we initiated discussion on the supplementary estimates was that when there was a general administration item for a department a general discussion would be allowed. This was the interpretation I placed on the understanding which was reached at the time, and this is the way I have explained it to the committee at various times. I see no justification for allowing a general discussion on a vote such as this, which is not a general administration vote.
In addition, if I may say one other word, my recollection is that I have been in the chair most of the time while we have been discussing supplementary estimates. This very problem which is being raised by the hon. member for Oxford was considered when we were on supplementary estimates for the Department of External Affairs and might have been relevant to a discussion on that general item. I cannot see how it can be relevant to the item now before the committee.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: With respect, Your Honour, the minister in charge-I have forgotten his official title-of these supplementary estimates has said that none of these accounts could possibly involve the Cyprus expedition. There are a number of things covered by this vote such as transfer and removal expenses for the air force. These are the supplementary estimates for the latter part of the fiscal year 1963-64. Certainly a number of them are estimated expenses for that fiscal period which ended March 31 of that year. Now, the Cyprus expedition, and matters related to it, commenced before March 31. I am sure even the Secretary of State for External Affairs could not suggest that did not happen.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I just said that.


Mr.   Nesbill@: A number of Canadian aircraft were involved in transporting personnel to Cyprus. Since a number of these expenses are estimated and the estimates are for the fiscal year ending March 31, I cannot understand why these estimates would not cover the use of aircraft involved in the Cyprus operation. If the minister in charge of the treasury can

Supply-National Defence
explain that to my satisfaction, I might be the house has taken toward his continuous inclined to agree with Your Honour. This intervention. These estimates before the does not make any sense at all.	committee-


Lucien Lamoureux: The hon. member for Vancouver East.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I have the floor, Mr. Chairman, and if the minister is not replying to my argument I intend to continue, unless Your Honour rules me out of order.


George James McIlraith: I thought Your Honour had given a ruling on the matter. The simple fact is that since the Cyprus expenses are not covered by this item of national defence, I do not have the details for the separate Cyprus expenditures. What is in the item is travel and removal expenses. I am at a loss to understand the hon. member's assertion that this is the first time the estimates of the government have come before the committee because the main estimates came before the committee, then supplementary estimates (A), (B), (C), (D) and these are final supplementary estimates (E). These are the usual final, clean-up supplementary estimates that go to the end of our fiscal year.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: That is just the answer I was looking for, Mr. Chairman.


George James McIlraith: Additional costs were incurred because of the higher cost per move which went from $120 per move to $147 per move. Then, there were extra costs because of the withdrawal of the CF-100 squadrons from Europe in late 1962-63 and the disbandment of the 426 squadron and other units for which claims and costs were not paid until early 1963-64.
Another factor in the increase is the price increase for packing and crating and transportation put into effect by the Canadian warehousemen's association during the fiscal year. I think that is all I can give by way of an effective answer. I hope it does give the information the hon. member is seeking because, much as I would like to give him information on the other subject I do not have it for the reasons I have stated.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I think that answers the question I was asking, and I thank the minister. As the minister just said, these are the final supplementary estimates for the fiscal year 1963-64 and involve estimated expenditures for the last period in the fiscal year. Of course, Mr. Chairman, we all know that the Cyprus operation commenced in the very last part of this fiscal year.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Chairman. I suggest with great respect to my hon. friend that he is abusing the privilege of the house and the attitude


David Vaughan Pugh: I rise on a point of order.


Lucien Lamoureux: Order; we can only have one point of order at a time and the Secretary of State for External Affairs has the floor.


David Vaughan Pugh: I rise on a question of privilege.


Lucien Lamoureux: The Chair can entertain only one point at a time. When the minister has completed his point of order I will be able to hear the hon. member on his point of privilege.


Paul Joseph James Martin: What I want to say, Mr. Chairman-


David Vaughan Pugh: I would like to say, Mr. Chairman, on my point of privilege-


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have the floor.


Lucien Lamoureux: Order; the hon. member will recognize that I cannot have two points under discussion at the same time. We are having one point discussed at the moment.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I repeat to my hon. friend that at the appropriate moment I will welcome this opportunity, but I should remind the hon. member than when external affairs supplementary estimates were being discussed, we spent one afternoon and evening on the Cyprus question. I do not know whether or not my hon. friend was preoccupied with other important business, but if he was in the house he will remember that discussion.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Quite a few things have happened since.


Paul Joseph James Martin: It was initiated by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. These estimates have been before the committee since March 6. There was no Cyprus operation so far as Canada was concerned until March 13. These two dates surely indicate clearly that the supplementary estimates before the committee at the present time could not conceivably involve any expenditure arising out of the Cyprus operation. I suggest to you, Mr. Chairman, that since you have made a ruling the hon. gentleman ought to respect that ruling, and ought to give way to the hon. member for Vancouver East who has been trying to speak for a long time.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: The Secretary of State for External Affairs is very persuasive, as we all know, and I appreciate his point of view, but I must make-


David Vaughan Pugh: Mr. Chairman-

Supply-National Defence


Lucien Lamoureux: Does the hon. member wish to rise on the question of privilege?


David Vaughan Pugh: I merely wish to point out to Your Honour that when the Secretary of State for External Affairs got on his feet on a point of order, the hon. member for Oxford was speaking on that point of order.


Lucien Lamoureux: No, it was not my understanding that he was speaking on a point of order. I believe he was making a substantive argument.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Well, I must say on the point of privilege, that the Secretary of State for External Affairs has suggested to Your Honour and to the committee that I have been misusing the privileges of the house in discussing points of order with Your Honour. All I can say is that no member of the house, in the 11 or so years I have been here, has spent more time discussing points of order, appropriate and otherwise, than the hon. member for Essex East. To suggest that anybody else who deigns to discuss a point of order with Your Honour, or with whomever is sitting in Your Honour's chair, is abusing the rules of the house is a kind of logic that defeats any reasonable person.
While I frankly do not place much stock in the argument I have heard from the Secretary of State for External Affairs and from the minister in charge of the treasury, if Your Honour rules that I cannot discuss this matter of Cyprus, a matter of the greatest importance at the present time, I will obey Your Honour's ruling, but I think it is a very strange and odd attitude on the part of the government.


Lucien Lamoureux: In my opinion the rules preclude the hon. member from discussing this matter along the lines which he was following a moment ago. If there is some way that any matter can be brought within the ambit and the limitations of vote No. 35e, then of course the Chair would not want to try to restrict the hon. member. But I feel we have a very specific item before us and that our discussion should be limited to this item in the light of the rule of relevancy.


Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Chairman, I would like to deal specifically with the item before the committee, and in view of the fact that we spent 25 minutes this afternoon on procedure, I shall be very brief because it is my sincere thought that if we are brief and deal with the items in front of us, then perchance we might be able to finish the supplementary estimates by tomorrow night, which I hope we can do.
I would like some information about the Royal Canadian Air Force, and I hope this


will be in order because it concerns something which occurred a number of weeks ago. I regret that the Minister of National Defence is not in his seat. I notice unfortunately he left the chamber just as his supplementary estimates were called, but I hope that the associate minister, or perhaps the Secretary of State for External Affairs, will be able to give the information I seek.
I am sure all members of the committee would appreciate some information as to what was the new arrangement that was worked out a number of weeks ago with France and with NATO relative to the R.C.A.F. The only information we got was that contained in the press several weeks ago, that two of the squadrons are being moved from France to Germany and two are being left in France.
The information received by our defence committee, when we were in France, was to the effect that there were French squadrons in Germany and that they would be kept in Germany because only by having them in Germany could the French squadrons be equipped with nuclear warheads. On what basis are we maintaining two of our squadrons in France when they cannot be equipped there for the purpose for which they were bought by the previous government?
What exactly is the role of the two squadrons now in France, and is it correct that a decision was reached with France and NATO a number of weeks ago that these two squadrons of CF-104 planes are going to have an entirely different role, and will have to be re-adapted or re-equipped to carry conventional warheads in their new role?
On what basis is Canada still maintaining two squadrons in France while France maintains squadrons in Germany? Second, what is their role? Third, because of some mistake, stupidity or misunderstanding by the previous government in its purchase agreements, who has to pay for the re-adaptation of these two CF-104 squadrons in France, and what is the approximate figure of the cost of that readaptation?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I do not think I can let pass the reference made by the hon. member for Vancouver East concerning the Minister of National Defence.


Harold Edward Winch: Well, he did leave just as the item was called.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I realize he left, but he did not leave because he did not want to answer questions.


Harold Edward Winch: I did not say that. I said I noticed he left and I did not comment on the reasons.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Just in case the hon. member might have that somewhere in the back of his mind, I would like to say the minister had to leave the committee, and it was with regret he did so. I would also like to say that I think there has been, on the part of the Minister of National Defence, a very frank and open discourse on what was happening in the Department of National Defence. Also, I believe there will be opportunities within a day or so, in the budget debate, when these matters can be brought up again. Further, as hon. members know, it is understood that all the national defence reorganization may be discussed in the special committee on national defence. It is most unfair if anyone should get the idea on these particular estimates, which are the fifth and last, that we are not willing to give the committee whatever information we can.
The hon. member was asking about the air squadrons in Europe. I do not think the difficult position of the Canadian government in that respect is a secret to anyone, and the purpose of sending the squadrons we had in France to Germany was in order to get out of an impasse which was not of our making. To do this we have given the squadrons remaining in France a reconnaissance role. All our squadrons will have a dual role, both strike and reconnaissance, but the aircraft of the squadrons in France will be limited to the reconnaissance role.
As the hon. member may appreciate, this was a course that was devised in order to have a useful role for our air squadrons, and I understand there is to be a sort of rotation between our squadrons in France and Germany so that they will be able to exercise both roles.
I do not believe I can add anything to what my colleague the Minister of National Defence has stated with regard to this matter both in the house and in the committee. I regret I cannot offhand give the cost of this particular move, but I will find out so that hon. members may have this information. I think the hon. member realizes that with regard to this matter of the air squadrons in Europe we are doing the best we can, having inherited a difficult situation.


Harold Edward Winch: May I ask the hon. gentleman how there can be a possibility of rotating R.C.A.F. planes between France and Germany when our squadrons in Germany are equipped for the handling of nuclear weapons, whereas our squadrons in France are now being changed over to use only conventional weapons? Are all the planes to be changed so that they may fulfil a dual role?
20220-122J
Supply-National Defence


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: They are being changed, now, so that they will be able to carry out a dual role, and the pilots will also be rotated.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Chairman, I think I am allowed under this item to read a resolution passed by the district council of the Sague-nay-Lake St. John national labaur union.
We are considering today the administration of the Royal Canadian Air Force, and the resolution in question deals with the storage of nuclear arms at the Bagotville military base, which comes under the Royal Canadian Air Force, the expenditures of which we are now considering.
I will simply read the resolution:
At a regular meeting of the district council of the Saguenay-Lake St. John national labour union held at Arvida on January 19, 1964, a resolution was put forward asking the district council to protest strongly to the Prime Minister of Canada, and to the federal members of parliament of the district, against storage of nuclear warheads at the Bagotville base.
The council executive was directed to prepare the following resolution:
Considering the stand taken by the national labour union in previous conventions.
Considering the danger which such atomic weapons constitutes for the people of eur district in case of war.
Considering that the mere presence of such nuclear warheads on our soil makes our district a potential target and can transform this area into a radioactive desert.
Whereas such weapons do not constitute an effective means of long range defence.
Whereas Canada can play a doubly effective part by working for peace.
Our council asks the district, especially all representative bodies of our district, to protest to government authorities in order that they may abandon their projects.
We hope that you will take this letter under special consideration: your viewpoint would be very much appreciated by our members.
Yours truly,
Saguenay-Lake St. John Regional Local of the National Unions.
And it is signed Elmer Proulx, secretary.
Mr. Chairman, I want to be the mouth-piece of the national unions of the Saguenay-Lake St. John area and I strongly support this resolution on their part.


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. I allowed the hon. member to read the resolution he mentioned in order that we might determine its nature.
In my opinion, the question of nuclear weapons is not connected in any way, directly or indirectly, with the item under study; it even goes beyond the restricted limits of this item. Consequently, I invite the hon. member to restrict his observations to what he has just said.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Chairman, please note that in credit 35e now under study, mention

Supply-National Defence is made of "miscellaneous materials and supplies, $1,150,000". Then, how can we say that in these miscellaneous supplies-nuclear weapons are also supplies, not only in winter but in fall and spring, they are miscellaneous supplies relating to airplanes at Bagotville?
I believe that these things, these supplies of fuel, gasoline, fuel oil, lubricants for aircraft and mechanical equipment, are related to the subject I am discussing now: supplies and upkeep of equipment. Supplementary estimates are being requested for the upkeep of that equipment at Bagotville, and I wish to say that I fully endorse the text of the resolution which has been approved unanimously by the labour union in my area and more especially in the Arvida-Jonquiere-Kenogami area.
The population, including the social and municipal bodies and the farmers' unions, object to the storage of nuclear arms in our area. But the government, here in Ottawa, refuses to recognize the objections raised by the whole population of one area.
Mr. Chairman, it becomes serious in my opinion when a government pays no attention and does not even care about the protests voiced by all the people, all the social and municipal bodies of an area, and keeps storing nuclear arms in a peaceful region inhabited by peace-minded citizens working peacefully and contributing to the development of our country.


Lucien Lamoureux: I have listened with great interest to the remarks of the hon. member and I am sure he will agree with me that they are of a much too general a nature for the limited scope of the vote under consideration.


Gilles Grégoire: Then, Mr. Chairman, I will conclude by speaking of this vote to which, I want to make it clear, I am opposed. It includes an amount of $1,150,000 for miscellaneous materials and supplies which will be used for the storage of nuclear weapons at Bagotville.
I wish to register a protest also against the vote for gasoline, fuel oil and lubricants for aircraft and mechanical equipment if that material is to be used for the storage of nuclear weapons.
I protest against this vote concerning repairs and maintenance of equipment, if this includes equipment to be used for storing nuclear arms at the Bagotville military base.
I protest, and I object to these estimates, not only in my own name, but on behalf of the whole population of the Saguenay-Lake St. John district. I do it with all the vigour I am capable of, and Mr. Chairman, when you ask if this item is agreed to, please


report that it is on division, and report further on division of the member for Lapointe.


Mr. Rynard:: I should like to inquire what plans the department has for, or what the department intends to do with, the radar station in Edgar which is in my riding and which, I believe, will be closed as of July 1.
I should like to point out that this is a community of a certain size. It has its own fire brigade, its own power plant, three dormitories accommodating 500 people and about 85 housing units. The point I wish to make is that this is a responsibility of the federal government. An investment has been made amounting I believe to some $9 million. It has been accepted that the federal government has some role to play in education. For example, when vocational schools are constructed the federal government pays three quarters of the cost of the building and of the equipment used in the operation of those schools. I should like to go further and ask the minister what plans he has. Is he contemplating an educational centre or a vocational school, so that there may be continuity in this area?
I ask this because, as the minister knows, there is a choice between educating the people or making welfare payments, providing unemployment insurance, relief and so on. Therefore I say to him that while they are spending millions of dollars advising people to obtain more education so they will stay off the unemployment insurance and relief rolls, and so forth, on the other hand they cannot afford to close up a building such as this. I also want to stress the point that a great many workers have their roots in this community; they have been employed there for 11 or 12 years and have their homes in this area. Therefore I would appreciate an answer as to what the minister intends to do in this matter. I would state further that it is my opinion that some educational or semieducational plan should be adopted in order that those buildings can be utilized to the full, in view of the need today for further education.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Chairman, I think my hon. friend should know that the department is certainly not indifferent to what is happening to some of these communities where the radar stations are being closed down. Having said how concerned we are with what is happening, I think it is only fair also to say that I believe it would not be logical policy for the department to keep maintaining and operating stations which are no longer useful.
What has been done and what is contemplated in the future is that whenever one of

these radar stations is to be disbanded, it is immediately turned over to crown assets. The Department of Defence Production and the Minister of Industry have in their own organization a group of people who are trying to establish contact with the provincial governments and other groups and associations to study how these radar stations might be usefully used. A real effort is being made in this sense in order to try and get the provinces interested in utilizing these very excellent facilities.
Another point, of course, is that most of these stations are in rather isolated areas, and it is difficult at times to interest people in going to these areas. However, Mr. Chairman, I can assure my hon. friend that everything it is humanly possible to do is now being done.


Philip Bernard Rynard: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the minister for his answer. I would draw to his attention that this is not a particularly isolated area; it is just about seven miles from a city one way and it is about 15 miles from a town with a population of 15,000. Also, it is only four miles off a super highway. I am wondering whether the minister, through dominion-provincial relations, could in some way get a program going of some form of education without even going through crown assets and wasting that time.


Lucien Lamoureux: The hon. member for Edmonton West.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Chairman, the hon member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm has asked me whether he might ask it first.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I should like to direct a question to the Associate Minister of National Defence. Does he intend to provide the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean with a four year course, the same as Kingston?
Surely, the minister is aware that several of his colleagues from the province of Quebec, and particularly the Minister without Portfolio, the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville (Mr. Dupuis), have formally promised, on behalf of their party, that the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean would have a four year course, the same as Kingston. That is why I am asking the minister whether or not that four year course will be established.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the interest my hon. friend has always shown concerning this matter. Other hon. members from both sides of the house are also interested in it.
Now, for the Department of National Defence, it was not only a matter of reorganizing the armed forces, but reorganizing also
Supply-National Defence the military colleges. As I said before, we are carrying out a thorough study of military training with a view to revising it according to standards we consider necessary for our armed forces.
I regret no decision has yet been taken, and I am not in a position to give a definite answer to the hon. member's question.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I wish to ask a supplementary question. I asked the minister a very definite question, that is if the government would keep the promise made by some of its members, in particular the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napier-ville. I am not asking that it be kept within a month or two; whether it is at the end of this year or next year, I am asking the government if it will keep the distinct promise made on behalf of his party by the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Chairman, I would not like any misunderstanding about that. What I want to tell my hon. friend is that when the study I referred to is completed, we will take the most effective steps in the interest of the college and the country.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Chairman, with regard to the question asked by the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon)-


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. The hon. member for Edmonton West.


Mr. Lamheri:: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I should like to raise two points with the associate minister. First of all, from time to time in the past there has been some difficulty about travelling and moving expenses with regard to the air force, the army and the navy. I think the minister will agree that within the last year or so criminal charges have been laid with regard to the falsification of moving expenses. There have been some irregularities in this connection. I am wondering, therefore, what steps have been taken recently to eliminate as much as possible the giving of kickbacks and the other irregular practices which have cropped up from time to time. I do not say that they have existed only in recent years, but they have occurred from time to time. I remember that when I was associated with the Department of National Defence back in 1957, this was a problem. It has exercised the Canadian warehousemen's association, and they themselves very much deprecate the existence of these practices. There is somehow built into the present system of the movement of service personnel a type of facility which leads to these practices. I believe this is caused by the

Supply-National Defence competition. I do not know whether the Department of National Defence has worked out some arrangement with the Canadian warehousemen's association of policing this sort of thing. I know it is deprecated by service officers and certainly by the association as a whole.
However, we do know that such practices have existed and certainly excessive weights have been used at times. This has been drawn to the attention of the public by the Auditor General. I should like to receive an indication from the minister, either today or on some other occasion, as to just what has been done in order to tidy this up, so there is as little chance as possible for, shall we say, sharp practices in regard to moving expenses.
The other point I wish to raise with the hon. minister is this. Can he tell us at this stage-and there may be reasons why he cannot-what is to be the ultimate use of the four very large installations that were used by the United States air force as refuelling bases?
The last of these, Namao R.C.A.F. station, is to be phased out on July _1 next. There are some very extensive facilities. Some of the runways are used jointly with the R.C.A.F. and there are other buildings and what have you, such as fuel storage facilities, put up at the expense of the United States government, of which I am sure some very adequate use could be made, particularly at the two bases at Cold Lake and Namao.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Chairman, personally I have not been aware that there is any great wave of irregularities in connection with removal and travelling expenses. There are some recommendations contained in the Glassco commission report in this regard, but unfortunately I am not in a position to advise my hon. friend today what measures will be taken to correct the situation. However, I will look at the matter and inform him at a later date.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Chairman, I wish to correct any misapprehension there may be. I am not saying there has been a great wave, but there have been cases. Individual members of the Canadian warehousemen's association have definitely spoken of this, and I would like to know what efforts are being made to control this sort of thing.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I will look into the matter.


Mr. Churchill:: Mr. Chairman, I am sorry to detain the minister for external affairs, but when he makes a statement in this house I take a little time to think over what he has said and then I go back and examine the record to see whether or not what he has said is accurate. I am glad he is now

here to listen to my submission, because a little while ago he attempted to make the case that the subject of Canada's participation in the United Nations Cyprus force should not be discussed under these estimates because the estimates were tabled on March 6. This is accurate. His statement concerning our participation in the Cyprus expedition was not made until March 13, so it follows that the estimates which were tabled on March 6 could not possibly have anything in them which would pertain to the Cyprus expedition.
I would point out, Mr. Chairman, that the subject of the troubles in Cyprus was raised in this house on Monday, February 24, by the hon. member for Edmonton West. The Prime Minister replied to him in these words which appear at page 129 of Hansard:
There has been no additional request made of Canada for participation in any such force but, as the house knows, we have laid down certain conditions which we feel should be observed before Canada participates in a force of that kind.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is right.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Obviously the government was considering the question of Canada's participation in an international force as early as February 24.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Long before that.


Gordon Minto Churchill: When the Prime Minister and the minister of external affairs rose this afternoon to object to the hon. member for Oxford making a statement about the Cyprus expedition I knew that perhaps they were attempting to conceal something.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, my hon. friend has not helped his case by his last reference. There has never been any refusal to discuss this matter. Indeed, my hon. friend is now proving that we have had very considerable discussion. There is only one point before the committee at the present time and that is whether or not the particular item involves an expense which could be properly attributable to Canada's undertaking in the United Nations peace keeping force. That is the issue and no other. The question of Cyprus has been discussed many times in this house, but what we are now concerned with is this particular item of expenditure. I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that unless the hon. gentleman addresses himself to that point he is not in order.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, we can always expect an intervention by the minister of external affairs no matter which side of the house he sits on.


Erik Nielsen: And against the rules too.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, generally against the rules. I did not say that anything was being concealed. I said that perhaps there was an attempt at concealment. When the minister of external affairs is talking with that skill and verbosity which is his and his alone, there is sometimes the expectation on the part of some hon. members that there is concealment involved.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Be careful now.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I am making no accusation. Yesterday I was asking him about regular forces from Greece and Turkey and he persisted in talking about Cypriot forces which I had not even mentioned; so the minister is sometimes not very clear in his activities.
I direct my attention specifically to the estimate in front of us, which is a vote of over $13 million, involving some $1.5 million for travelling and removal expenses, another item of $3.5 million for gasoline, fuel oil, and so on. It will take a little convincing to persuade me that these very large items are not related in some way to the expectation that Canada would participate in some overseas activity under United Nations command. Because as the minister for external affairs said when I mentioned February 24, the government was considering such a thing earlier than that. A government which boasted of its decision would surely have made plans prior to that with regard to the expenses for the air force and army. It might have interrupted the writing of the white paper by the Minister of National Defence; perhaps that was the delay which was caused. But I am sure he was figuring out how much more it would cost if Canada participated in a United Nations force. Consequently that is why I question the earlier intervention of the minister of external affairs in trying to persuade the house that nothing in these supplementary estimates pertain to that matter.


George James McIlraith: Would the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre permit me to interrupt him for a moment to make a request of the committee. In all the time devoted to government business today we have not put through one item of these final supplemen-taries. This is the fourteenth day that these final supplementaries have been called and brought before the committee, although admittedly on some days, for example today, the question period has been rather long and the period devoted to government business short.


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. I regret I must interrupt the minister in order to permit the house to proceed with the consideration of private
Supply-National Defence members' business. Shall I rise report progress, and ask leave to sit again at the next sitting of the house?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Progress reported.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, before you proceed with private members' hour I should like to continue the request I was in the midst of making in committee to find out whether the house would consider forgoing private members' hour today in an effort to get at least some of these items through.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it agreed we suspend private members' hour and return to committee of supply?


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I should like to make the suggestion that we go much further than giving up this hour. I see little value in giving up this private members' hour if it is going to do nothing to shorten this debate.
I do not think there is any reason to attribute blame for this. I think one should recognize that it has been a long time since members have had an ample opportunity to examine the various departments and to question the various ministers. There was a long time when there were no estimates. The general estimates for last session came in during the closing days of the session. Many members were willing to forgo questions they wanted to ask and matters they wanted to raise in the interests of winding up the session at a reasonable time. So I do not think that any real blame attaches to members for the fact that these supplementary estimates have taken a considerable period of time.
On the other hand, I think it is most advisable now to try to wind up the discussion of these supplementary estimates. As far as the members of this party are concerned, if some agreement can be reached we would be quite willing to confine ourselves to one speaker on each of the departments or, if that were not agreeable, to undertake that if there are any departments still not dealt with by ten o'clock tomorow night we will be prepared to let them go through with a view to winding up these supplementary estimates not later than ten o'clock tomorrow evening. But unless we can set some deadline for the disposing of these supplementary estimates it seems to me that merely taking another hour of private members' time does not add anything at all. It just means that discussion of the supplementary estimates may go on for another hour or for a stipulated period of time. If it is agreeable to the other parties in the house we would be prepared to give an undertaking to dispose of these

Supply-National Defence supplementary estimates not later than ten o'clock tomorrow night. If we finish sooner, so much the better, but we would be prepared to terminate any discussion by ten o'clock tomorrow evening.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether we have reverted to motions or how we happened to be on this discussion. It is rather interesting to be attempting to settle the order of business of the house in this way. It reminds me very much of the Thursday before Good Friday when a member of the N.D.P. called it six o'clock and prevented just such a discussion taking place.


Mr. Leboe:: Mr. Speaker, I agree we should make some provision but I think this should be done through the house leaders. We have two days of the budget debate left and six supply motions to come up. These matters will take 14 days and in addition we have all the main estimates of the departments to consider. I am wondering whether we are going to get any legislation through the house.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Speaker, I agree with the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam with respect to continuing through private members' hour today, but I cannot agree on any understanding that we should finish these estimates by ten o'clock tomorrow night. We have been waiting for quite a while to speak on some of these estimates and in my view not only the opposition but also the government must accept some blame for the fact that the house has taken so long to pass them. I know that some of our members have something to say on them. Therefore our party cannot undertake to terminate the discussion by ten o'clock tomorrow night, but we are willing to forgo private members' hour today.


Gordon Minto Churchill: As far as our party is concerned we are prepared to give up private members' hour today.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is there unanimous consent to dispense with private members' hour?


Mr. Brewin:: May I say a word on that, Mr. Speaker? I am the private member whose resolution was to come up today. I am perfectly prepared to concur in giving unanimous consent to deal with these estimates. My own personal opinion is that they should have been disposed of some time ago. I am perfectly prepared to give up the time I would have had, but I suggest to those who represent the government in the management of the business of the house that they should make suggestions like the present one a few minutes before they intend to ask the house to deal with them. Just a few hours ago I was approached by the government whip and asked

to be prepared to proceed today. I simply wish to suggest that a little more planning and forethought could well go into this sort of suggestion.


Alexander Bell Patterson: Mr. Speaker, we would certainly be ready to forgo private members' hour, but I think we should try to reach some understanding with regard to what is going to happen from now on. If we simply forgo this hour it means that we will have another hour on these estimates so that discussion of them can be stretched out a little more. I do not see anything to be gained by that. Therefore I think we should try to reach some understanding that discussion will terminate at a certain time.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is there unanimous agreement among members to forgo the private members' hour?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Bell:: Postpone it.

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



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE

[Stage Direction]
Royal Canadian Air Force-
35c. Operation and maintenance, $13,653,000.
Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, I was advancing an argument just, before five o'clock, with which the Secretary of State for External Affairs seemed to be in agreement, that the large amount of money in this estimate must have had something to do with a proposed international commitment of Canada some time before the end of March because the Cyprus trouble was being considered by the government early in February. Unless the Associate Minister of National Defence is prepared to rise and say that not one single dollar of the travelling and removal expenses and the gasoline and fuel oil expenses had any relation whatsoever to an anticipated movement of troops and aircraft overseas, we can only assume that items as large as these must relate to that. Otherwise, if he says they do not relate to it-


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Chairman-


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. The hon. member has the floor.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I am still talking and the minister can wait. Let me make it clear-


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman-


Lucien Lamoureux: Is the minister rising on a point of order?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Yes, Mr. Chairman. The hon. member asked me to get up and state whether or not any of the amounts of money here were earmarked for the international force, and I do get up and say that there is no money in the estimates now before us that is earmarked for the international force.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I did not ask the minister to get up immediately. He might have let me finish my sentence. I was going on to say that if he was going to get up and say that not one single dollar of this was in anticipation of paying the expenses of Canada's participation in an international force, then he was going to be in some trouble in explaining to us why these sums are so large, coming at. the end of a fiscal year. I wonder what his explanation will be. Perhaps he would like to give it now in view of the answer he gave half a minute ago.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I think it would perhaps save a lot of time if I were to take the different items and give an explanation of them. As far as the first item of $1,445,000 is concerned, the explanation is that which was given by the President of the Privy Council. It has to do with the removal and travelling of personnel. The average cost per move had been estimated too low at $120 per move and had to be increased to $147. There was additional cost in regard to transfers brought about by the withdrawal of the CF-100 squadrons from Europe late in 1962 and 1963 and the disbanding of No. 426 squadron and other units for which many claims and accounts were not paid until 1963 and early in 1964. Then another factor is the price increase for packing, crating and transportation put into effect by the Canadian warehousemen's association, and that accounts for this amount of $1,445,000.
In so far as materials and supplies are concerned, there is fuel for heating and cooking. The forecast was over-expended by $305,000 and this was mainly due to an underestimate for the 18 new radar units introduced into the R.C.A.F. in 1962-63.


David Vaughan Pugh: Did the minister mention radar equipment?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Yes, 18 new radar units introduced into the air force.


David Vaughan Pugh: Where is that used; I wonder if the minister can tell us?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I understand that these were taken over when we had a change-over of administration between the United States and Canada on the Pine Tree line.
Then, there is the item for gasoline, fuel oil and lubricants for aircraft. There has been historically a shortfall in the annual flying
Supply-National Defence hours which logistic staffs have usually applied to estimates for oils and lubricants of 15 per cent. However, the 1962-63 totals were not available when the 1963-64 estimates were prepared. So far this year indications have been that the shortfall will be very small this year.


Erik Nielsen: On that point, I wonder if the minister could assure the committee that none of the $3.5 million used for the purchase of these aircraft lubricants was used for lubricants or fuel for aircraft going to Cyprus in this operation?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Because of the time involved, I would be morally certain that it did not. These estimates, of course, were made before we were involved in this operation.


David Vaughan Pugh: Just on that point, Mr. Chairman, may I say that I thought when we were having a few words with the minister of external affairs on this point, the understanding was that away back in February the armed services were preparing for the Cyprus operation. One branch of the armed services is the air force and one purpose of the air force is transport. I should like to know, and I am sure other hon. members would like to know, if any of these $3.5 million worth of gasoline and lubricants were used in these aircraft transporting Canadian personnel to Cyprus, or by aircraft on the island of Cyprus.
The minister would have to be very certain before he answered that question because $3.5 million is a lot of money. As has been pointed out before, these supplementary estimates (E) are the fifth supplementary estimates and are the final ones for the year. Surely the Minister of National Defence, the minister looking after these estimates and the Secretary of State for External Affairs have looked into these matters and will have looked into them as far back as Christmas time when the Cyprus operation or some other necessary peace keeping operation for which Canada would have to be prepared was in their minds. I said the minister would have to be careful in answering. Were there, to his knowledge, any of the oils or lubricants accounted for by this item used in transporting Canadian personnel to Cyprus?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I am quite sure that the
members of the house want to get ahead with the work of the committee and want to see this matter pushed through as quickly as possible. I have stated that I am personally sure there is not any amount of money involved in these items that was used in the transport to Cyprus. I am informed that the bills for that particular exercise have

Supply-National Defence not been received as yet. I am morally certain that there is nothing for the Cyprus exercise that is reflected in these items.


David Vaughan Pugh: The minister is saying, then, that up until the final decision to go to Cyprus, which was after these estimates were prepared, the Royal Canadian Air Force was not prepared in any way, shape or form. None of these lubricants were used in these aircraft or in any of the aircraft which would have been used in Cyprus. It seems ridiculous to me to think that there was no preparation. Surely, there was preparation. The Secretary of State for External Affairs said that it was well before February when preparations were made. Surely there was a state of preparedness on the part of the Royal Canadian Air Force and the other armed services in Canada which would involve these expnditures being made. We have heard that we have not had the bills for Cyprus, but have we had the bills for the preparations and are they part of these supplementary estimates?


Lucien Lamoureux: Order; I am just wondering if the hon. member would not agree with me that at this point of his questioning he is going beyond the scope of the item? I assume that possibly the minister will want to reply to the original question he was asked, but I wonder whether we should not limit ourselves to this point now.


David Vaughan Pugh: With respect, Your Honour, I was just finishing my remarks. This is a fairly important matter and it goes back to the point of order which was debated a while ago.


George James McIlraith: And which was dealt with and cannot be debated again since a decision was given.


David Vaughan Pugh: It could be that we are talking about something that is quite germane at the present time, namely lubricants to the value of $3.5 million. Without getting into an argument, I am going to close now if the minister will tell us the expenditures for the preparedness of the armed services were contained in the original estimates and supplementaries (A), (B), (C), (D) and (E), and that no part of this $3.5 million is for the Cyprus force?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I have answered the hon. member's question as best I can. I do not intend to go on trying to rationalize this particular matter. I think the hon. member realizes as well as I do that we have aircraft that are prepared and have been prepared for a long time. What I am saying is that the bills for the amount of money involved in having aircraft leave Canada to go to


Cyprus have not yet even come in. I am morally certain that there is nothing in these estimates which reflects that operation and I am not believe I can say more.
If I may, I should like to continue reading the rest of the items involved. There is an item of $1,150,000 for miscellaneous supplies.
The main factors in the increase in the 1962-63 accounts carried forward for this year include underestimate for liquid and gaseous oxygen for new aircraft, Yukon CF-101 and CF-104; underestimate for chemicals related to increased requirements mainly for water purification chemicals for new radar sites; underestimate for miscellaneous cordate and textiles; new requirement for hexafluoride gas for FPS 26 and 27 radars.
Then we have repairs and upkeep of equipment and the deficiency in this primary is due mainly to the fact that this primary bore the brunt of the general shortage of operation and maintenance funds in 1962-63, resulting in $4,752,000 in accounts being carried over for payment this year. In addition, at least $2 million and perhaps as much as $6 million is needed to cover an unforeseen increase in repair costs of the LN3 navigation system for CF-104 aircraft.
The last item, $1,239,000 includes underestimation for non-residential school fees and school contributions. This completes the amount of $13,653,000 which I feel has nothing whatever to do with the operation in Cyprus.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Chairman, a few minutes ago, I was listening to the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon) discuss the course given at the College Mili-taire Royal de Saint Jean, and ask the minister for an extension of two years, as it is the case for the Kingston Royal Military College. He also mentioned that this promise was made by the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville (Mr. Dupuis) during the last election campaign and that, of course, it would involve additional expenditures.
Now, I would like to know from the Associate Minister of National Defence whether the Minister without Portfolio, made that promise on his own, or whether he was authorized by the government to do so. Moreover, I ask the minister to tell us whether the government intends to carry out the promise made by the hon. member for St. Jean-Iber-ville-Napierville and extend the course at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member is well aware of the long-time interest taken by the Minister without Portfolio in the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean, since it is located in his native city.

I believe that during the election campaign he probably may have expressed a strong desire to see a two year extension of the course at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean. He obviously put pressure on the department at the very beginning, when we came into office. We did not need to be pushed, because we were of the opinion that we had to revise completely our system of military colleges.
At this time we contemplate a reconstitution of its framework. As I explained to the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Mont-calm, we have not decided yet how we will proceed, because we shall await the report of those who are investigating in this respect.
I would have the hon. member know that the problem cannot be solved as easily as it would seem. It is a problem which might have many implications. We want for the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean something fine, although perhaps it will not be necessarily the same course as at the military college at Kingston. Consequently, I am not in a position to give a definite answer to the question of my hon. friend.


Raymond Langlois: I am quite willing to believe the minister when he says the project was but a wish made during the last election campaign and that the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville may have expressed a fervent wish, but I would prefer to use stronger words and say that the Minister without Portfolio did promise that, if a Liberal government were elected, another two years would be added to the course given at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean. That is a bit more than a fervent wish, but you can take it anyway you like.
In any case, how could he make such a promise, when the government was merely wishing. Could it be that the Minister without Portfolio exceeded his rights in making that promise or that some responsible member of his party had told him that the thing was coming, in short, that it was one of the government's projects?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member has as much experience in politics as I have, and there is no need for me to answer that question.


Mr. Nasserden:: Mr. Chairman, I had some difficulty in following the minister a few minutes ago. Could he tell me whether any of the expenditures under this vote were made at the R.C.A.F. station in Saskatoon during the past year, or in connection with the personnel and equipment of that station during the same period?
Supply-National Defence


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I am sorry, I do not have that information.


Edward Nasserden: I wonder if the minister would try to get it for us.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Yes, Mr. Chairman.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, a few minutes ago I asked a specific question of the minister. The hon. member for Megantic also raised the same question. Not only the member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville but also other Liberal candidates during the last election campaign formally promised, on behalf of their party, that the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean would be placed on the same footing as Kingston and that the course would be extended to four years. I would like the minister to tell me whether this promise will be kept. If the minister refuses to answer specifically, I will have to go on with the debate up to six o'clock and probably tomorrow.


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. I do not wish to prevent the hon. member for Joliette-L'As-somption-Montcalm from obtaining some information, but several questions have already been asked in connection with this point which furthermore he had originally raised. It seems that the hon. members who are discussing this problem should try to restrict their remarks to the item under consideration.


Raymond Langlois: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Chairman.
I think it was raised twice, and it will again be raised on other occasions because this has to do with promises, made during the last election campaign but when we want to talk about them when the house is in committee of supply, we cannot get an answer as to whether or not this is so. A similar situation occurred the other day when we were considering the estimates of the civil service commission.
Here we have other electoral promises about which we want explanations; we just want to know whether they represent government policy or whether they were made to the voters as a kind of bait.
We want to know the difference between the two.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I should like to put a question to the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Mcllraith) since he is probably in a better position to answer it than the Associate Minister of National Defence.
Could he tell us whether he is in favour of extending the course given at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean from two to four years, like the course at Kingston, as promised
1914	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence by the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville as well as by several Liberal candidates, during the last election campaign.
I am asking a specific question and if the minister gives an affirmative or positive answer, he can be assured of our full cooperation for the passage of these estimates.


George James McIlraith: I shall try to be as concise as the hon. member was in framing the question. I promise the committee that my answer will not be more lengthy than was the question which has been asked. First, I do not accept the assertion as to what various Liberal candidates may have said during the election campaign. I simply do not know whether the hon. member is qualified to quote them accurately-whether he attended the meetings, and whether he knows or not.
As to the other question about the course at the military college to which he referred, I regret very much to tell the committee that I do not know anything about that course. I do not know whether it is the best possible course. I have always heard it spoken of in favourable terms; references made to it in my presence have always been highly favourable. However, to expect me to know whether the course is the right length or the wrong length, or whether it should be extended, appears to me to be somewhat unreasonable and I must tell the committee that I do not know. I have never made a study of it. On the other hand, I have reason to believe that my colleague, the Associate Minister of National Defence is thoroughly familiar with the college, the type of course and the instruction given there, and so on, and as far as I am concerned he has given a competent and complete answer to the question which was asked.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I believe the cabinet is divided on this question, because it was certainly discussed. Many ministers do not favour any extension of the course at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean to place it on an equal footing with that at Kingston.
Once more I am asking the minister, and I hope to obtain his co-operation, because when he was himself in opposition I believe he declared himself favourable. Consequently, I am asking the minister whether he will implement the formal promises made by some of his colleagues to the effect that there would be a complete course at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean.
This promise was made all over the province of Quebec. It was not reiterated nationally, in fact, it was restricted to the province of Quebec. However, I want to tell 

the minister that at the time of the next election, Liberal candidates will have to be careful if they make promises and not to make any promises they do not intend to keep.


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. Once more, I must interrupt the hon. member. When he speaks about the next election or remote elections, he is wandering pretty far, it seems to me, from the item under study.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I am asking for the minister's co-operation. We are ready to pass these estimates as soon as possible, but I realize that it is impossible for us to obtain clear answers from the minister, from the President of the Privy Council, and from the minister of external affairs. We do not know the facts. We are asked to vote thousands of dollars, but it is impossible to know why those estimates must be passed.
We are celebrating this year the centennial of responsible government and it is the duty of the opposition to scrutinize the government's expenditures. I am asking the Minister of National Defence if, in the near future- I am not asking him to give a date-the government intends to "extend" the course given at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean and thus to put it on the same footing as the course given at Kingston.
That is all I want to know. I am not asking him to set a date, to say that it will be in a month or two but he could say that it will be in two years, for instance, in order to keep the distinct promises made during the last election campaign.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I would be very happy to get the co-operation of my hon. friend and I am convinced that, if he wants to co-operate, he will understand that in view of the fact that this matter is now under consideration, we are giving it all the attention it deserves and I cannot say now whether or not we will have the four year course.
All I can say is that we will give the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean what we feel is in the best interests of the cadets there.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Chairman, in the light of what the minister just said-


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. The Chair recognizes the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency.


Mr. Marcoux:: Mr. Chairman, I have been sitting here for several hours waiting to see if the estimates would be passed and now the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm tells us that it is the duty of the opposition to give close scrutiny to past expenditures covered by the supplementary estimates.

It would seem to me then that we cannot discuss the expenditures which could be made two or three years from now if the course were to be continued at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean.
I would ask the hon. member to wait until we examine estimates for future years and not past expenditures, since he will then have the opportunity of discussing them.
I am in favour of extending the course but I feel that this is not the time to discuss that question, especially since we have just agreed to dispense with private members' hour to save time.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. The hon. member definitely accused me of delaying the passage of the estimates. I feel it is the duty of every hon. member to scrutinize the estimates and ask questions in order to have definite answers, all the more so because the government committed itself to carry out its promises within 60 days, though nothing has been done in that respect and we do not know how matters stand.


Lucien Lamoureux: I do not see any question of privilege in that.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Chairman, the minister just said that this question was under consideration and that he was not in a position to tell us whether or not the course would be extended by two years.
All I can say is that during the last election campaign, the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville acted in excess of his rights towards the people of St. Jean and that he lied to them in making such a statement.


Erik Nielsen: I just have two or three brief questions to ask the associate minister. The first concerns the government's intention to increase the number of personnel at the R.C.A.F. station in Whitehorse, particularly in the technical field, as a result of the withdrawal of army technical personnel brought about by the change-over of jurisdiction from the Department of National Defence to the Department of Public Works in connection with Alaska highway maintenance.
The other question concerns Rockcliffe R.C.A.F. station. In view of the decision to remove all heavy aircraft from that station, can the minister tell us what plans are under consideration for the airfield, particularly with regard to air materiel installations there. Second, with regard to the establishment of a museum of aircraft in the three or four hangars available for that purpose at the station, might we have a little more information and, third, is it the intention of the
Supply-National Defence department to transfer to the Department of Transport jurisdiction over the flying operations now handled by the R.C.A.F.?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I realize these questions are all very important but I regret I do not have before me the information for which the hon. member asks. If he so desires I will try to obtain it for him. Unfortunately, I cannot give it to him without notice.


Erik Nielsen: If the minister could simply give me an undertaking that he will write me a letter answering these questions I would be quite happy.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I will do that.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I have a few questions to put to the minister concerning the air force in Europe. This would be a good time to have an explanation of what is going on there. Would the minister tell us how many planes we have there now, how many of them are completely equipped for the purpose for which they are intended, and where they are stationed?


Mr. Munro:: Filibuster.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, here is an interruption by an hon. member. I am asking for essential information, and we get the cry of "Filibuster".


John Carr Munro: That is exactly what it is.


Gordon Minto Churchill: If a filibuster is desired such as the Liberals put up in 1962-


John Carr Munro: It was nothing to match this one.


Gordon Minto Churchill: -of course we will contribute.


Erik Nielsen: You only went close to 26 days then.


George James McIlraith: Eight days.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I only want information from the Associate Minister of National Defence, and I am sorry the minister is not here. Is there a single, solitary plane over in Europe equipped to fight at this moment, because last November and December there was not one; they had no weapons on those planes; they did not have one single nuclear bomb ready to be fitted to the fuselage. At no time in Canada's history since the second world war was Canada's air force in a less prepared position than it was last fall and winter. I want to know, is it in a fighting fit condition now? If war broke out tomorrow, what could the Canadian air force in Europe do?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member claims that our fighting forces, and the
1936	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-National Defence
air force, were in the poorest possible position Mr. Churchill: Mr. Chairman, the As-in the history of Canada during last fall. That sociate Minister of National Defence is get-is not quite true-	ting to be a bit ridiculous.


Gordon Minto Churchill: It is true.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: -because it was in an even worse position when the hon. member was himself minister of national defence.


Gordon Minto Churchill: That is not true. The fighting squadrons were not disbanded over in Europe, and you know it. Tell the truth in this house.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: I am telling the truth, and I hope the hon. member will do the same. The hon. member is not asking questions to be informed, because what he is asking is already known. We are preparing the technical part of our weaponry so that we can arm our squadrons in time. I do not believe any aircraft are now armed. I understand they are working on the warehousing, or the storage, for the equipment.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, the Associate Minister of National Defence said that I was not asking questions for information. I was. He is not giving answers, because he cannot answer or he does not know or he refuses to give information to this house.


Mr. Winkler:: The government would be embarrassed.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I will ask him again. Is there one single, solitary plane of the Royal Canadian Air Force in Europe that is prepared for fighting action today or tomorrow? He has just told us "No". This has been the situation now for months. The Minister of National Defence disbanded the fighting squadrons that preceded the 104's before the 104's were ready for defensive action. I am asking the minister now: Are the nuclear dumps completed at the air stations in Germany? How nuclear bombs are there? How many of our planes are on alert in the enclosure in which they have to be placed when they have a nuclear bomb on the fuselage? Are they ready to contribute to the nuclear striking force of NATO?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Surely, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member is experienced enough to know that it would not be wise, for security reasons, to give the number of planes that are now in Europe or the number of bombs that are available. I think I have answered the question that he really wanted answered, but as far as the details of the number of planes and the other information for which he is asking is concerned, I think hon. members will realize that is not the type of information we would want to give out.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Not as much as you.


Gordon Minto Churchill: He says that parliament is not supposed to know the number of fighting aircraft we have available in our air force. What nonsense. Then why did they tell us the number of people who have gone to Cyprus? They should not have divulged that, because the Cypriots might find out. He will not inform parliament as to many planes we have in Europe and he will not tell us whether they are armed.


Erik Nielsen: He doesn't know.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I think he said they are unarmed. Our air force is defenceless in Europe-and parliament is not to be informed because, to use the phrase the Secretary of State for External Affairs uses all the time, "it is not in the national interest" for parliament to know any of these things. Where is the Minister of National Defence? We want more than white papers, you know; we want armed forces ready to fight. Where are they? The Minister of National Defence has now had almost 12 months with his study groups, and the air force in Europe is not ready for action.


Mr. Hahn:: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I fail to see the relevance of this argument to the item in the estimates under discussion at the present time.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The hon. member may not see the relevance of the argument. It is simply this. We cannot get the answers to questions from the government. If they would give us the answers, we would move on to the next problem. I asked the Associate Minister of National Defence certain questions with regard to the air force in Europe-this is the item of the estimates that pertains to the matter- and he cannot give me the answers.
May I ask him another question. He told us earlier that the aircraft in Europe are to be modified so they can carry nuclear weapons as well as conventional weapons. Let him now tell us how many have been so modified and what is the cost per plane for that modification.


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Chairman, I answered that question a while ago and said I did not know how much it would cost.


Gordon Minto Churchill: How many have been
modified?


Yvon Dupuis: Mr. Chairman, it has been drawn to my attention that some hon. members, especially the hon. member for Megan-

tic (Mr. Langlois) and the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon), have criticized the government because the course at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean is not complete.
I understand that the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm said that I had solemnly promised that the course would be a four year course. But, I have never solemnly promised a four year course. Now-


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Chairman-


Yvon Dupuis: Will you let me speak.
Now, when I was sitting on the other side of the house, I always requested that consideration be given to the feasibility of giving a complete course-


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. The minister should not question the word of an hon. member. He questions what was said by the hon. member for Megantic (Mr. Langlois), and what I stated myself. We maintain that the minister-


Yvon Dupuis: That is not a point of order.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: -gave a solemn promise-


Yvon Dupuis: A private member, or a single member, like the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm has no right to question the word of a minister, and more particularly not what I said.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I challenge your point of order.


Raymond Langlois: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman. I do not know what the minister is referring to, although he has questioned, as the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm has said, the word of some hon. members and mine.
These are exactly the words I said earlier: if the minister made a solemn promise to his voters-


Yvon Dupuis: Mr. Chairman-


Raymond Langlois: Let me finish. The Associate Minister of National Defence answered that the question of extending the course at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean by two years had not been decided yet. If the minister did make this formal promise, I reiterate my earlier statement, that he lied to his voters.


Yvon Dupuis: To sum up the discussion, I never promised that there would be an additional course, but I promised that, as soon as the Liberal government came to power, consideration would be given to the advisability of a full course. I have proof here in my hand. I know that the hon. member for Megantic is quite sincere. I wonder whether
Supply-National Defence the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm is; I am wondering.
I promised my constituents to look after the matter, as opposed to what the Conservatives were doing when they were sitting on this side of the house. They fooled around for six years and did nothing for the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean, while I urged them to do something.


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. If the minister wishes to correct the statements which may have been made concerning him, let him do it while remaining within the scope of the present debate.


Yvon Dupuis: May I say, Mr. Chairman, that my remarks will not go beyond the scope of the debate.
When I was sitting in the opposition I requested from the then minister of national defence that the advisability of giving a complete course at the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean be considered.
Now, on the 4th of November, the Minister of National Defence answered a letter of mine in which I had previously requested-


An hon. Member:: In what year?


Yvon Dupuis: -and here is my request to him.
I shall give you all that, because it is interesting for the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm, and to prove to him that we are looking after the interests of the voters, in accordance with what we say to them, during an election campaign.
On November 18, 1963, I wrote to the Minister of National Defence-and I would like the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm to listen, because he would learn a few things:

My dear Paul:
Thanks to the Liberal party, we have in Saint Jean, P.Q., a bilingual royal military college. However, as you know, this college dispenses only the first years of the course that has to be completed in Kingston. This situation is unfortunate and abnormal.

As you can see, my attitude has not changed since I have been sitting on this side of the house.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Convince your colleagues first.


Yvon Dupuis: Listen to me. I shall continue: [Text]
We believe that the College Militaire Royal in Saint Jean should be organized in order to dispense the complete course, starting next September.
During the years when the Conservative party was in power, I made many interventions about this in the House of Commons. Your predecessors:

Supply-National Defence
General Pearkes, Colonel Harkness and Pierre Se-vigny, answered that they were giving serious consideration to this question... but nothing was done.
I do not believe that since I am sitting with the government, I should refrain from asking for a complete course at the College Militaire Royal de St. Jean.
As Minister of National Defence, you are the president of the C.M.R., and as such, I am sure, that you will be proud to give instructions in order to permit this college to give a complete course. Could you tell me what has been done up to now by your department in view of permitting such a course?
As the C.M.R. has been established by our party,
I think that it is imperative for our Liberal government to complete that great achievement. Why should we wait any longer to take a decision when we all know that this has to be done one day?
Hoping to receive encouraging words from you very soon, I remain

And here is what the minister answered: [Text]
I have received your letter of November 18, concerning the College Militaire Royal de St. Jean.
Subsequent to Lucien Cardin's appointment as associate minister-
-and the minister is here tonight-
-he asked for a full report concerning the establishment of third and fourth years at College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean. This report is now being studied as part of my review of defence matters, and I should hope to be in a position soon to let you know the department's decision concerning the proposal that the third and fourth years be provided at College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean.

I protest when the hon. member tor Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm attempts, as usual, to cast doubts on my interest in my constituents and the fair claims of the province of Quebec. The hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm may well laugh, but during the six years when his government was in office he did nothing for the College Militaire Royal de Saint Jean. But I did write to my government and I continue to make the same demands as when I was in opposition.
I do not think it is very intelligent on the part of the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm to try to delay the debate-


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Keep quiet.


Yvon Dupuis: -try and delay the passing of the estimates. You want me to stop talking. But you, yourself, are asking me questions and when you get the answers, you want me to stop talking. I want you to know that I will not. You are insolent in your remarks and you make claims which are totally inaccurate.
Mr. Chairman, I wanted very much to put the record straight to let the house, the riding of St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville as

well as the whole province of Quebec know that when you belong to the Liberal party, whether you sit on one side of the house or the other, you keep on doing your work honestly. When in office, we still ask for the same things we did while in opposition, whereas some people, the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm for instance, kneel before their leader, the hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker) without asking for anything for Quebec during the six years their party was in power.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, on this side of the house we intended to vote these estimates before six o'clock, but since the minister does not want to co-operate with the ministers of his own party, we shall not be able to do so.
Mr. Chairman, to show the extent to which the Minister without Portfolio lacks judgment, he has written a letter in English to the Minister of National Defence instead of writing to the Associate Minister of National Defence who resides in the province of Quebec. This shows you his lack of consideration for the associate minister of defence. In other words, he admits that the Associate Minister of National Defence has little authority. He tried to-


Yvon Dupuis: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order.


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. Would the minister resume his seat? I merely want to point out to hon. members that, in my opinion, this matter, which has been discussed, examined and debated for about an hour, has been settled, not only in its substance but through the many points of order which were raised. It seems to me then this would be the proper time to adopt the vote now under consideration.

Shall this item carry?


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, before-


An hon. Member:: Sit down.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: No, Mr. Chairman, I will not let this item go through-


Yvon Dupuis: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, I want to get some information from the government, not orders.


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. The minister is
rising on a point of order.


Yvon Dupuis: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order because the hon. member has no right

to assert that I have no respect for the associate minister of defence, who is much more intelligent than the person who is trying to belittle me-


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. There is no point of order concerning the remarks just made by the minister.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, may I call it
six o'clock?


Lucien Lamoureux: Order. Shall I rise, report progress, and request leave to sit again at the next sitting of the house?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: You have a filibuster on your side and you will pay for it.


Guy Marcoux: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the leader of the house-


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Order. It would be more appropriate for the committee of supply to report progress.

Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the house leader if it is the intention of the government to go ahead with supplementary estimates tomorrow.


Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, I regret very much that because not one single item of these estimates has been passed today my speech is becoming very dull. My answer has
8, 1964	1939
Business of the House
to be the same as at the adjournment last night. We will be proceeding with the supplementary estimates tomorrow, and if they are completed, which I sincerely hope they will be, we will take second reading of the pension plan.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Does the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency wish to say something?


Guy Marcoux: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I should like to follow up on the question asked by the house leader of the official opposition (Mr. Churchill). I wish to ask the Minister of Justice (Mr. Favreau), who is also the leader of the government in the house, whether it would be possible to call a meeting of the representatives of the various parties to try to come to an agreement and conclude the examination of these supplementary estimates. Would it not be possible to try, in every way, to secure the co-operation of the other parties? I feel very few would refuse to accept proposals made by the minister.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: 1 do not think that it is the proper time to launch a debate to that effect-


Guy Marcoux: No, Mr. Speaker, it is not my
intention.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: -or on suggestions made.

The government leader has announced the business for tomorrow and I believe that is the only thing we can take up at this time.


[Stage Direction]
It being three minutes after six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]

[Stage Direction]


.
	
	
	
	
	
[Stage Direction]


' . 5-V "	'
, -	' y.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, April 9, 1964