1964-10-21

PRIVILEGE


Mr. Georges Valade (St. Mary):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege concerning the general behaviour of members of parliament as far as the provisions of the Post Office Act are concerned and I am doing so in order that the public may continue to have the confidence it should have in the Canadian postal service. I should like to refer to the Post Office Act, Revised Statutes of Canada 1952, vol. 4, chapter 212, and more particularly to section 39 which reads as follows:
Subject to the provisions of this act and the regulations respecting undeliverable mail, mailable matter becomes the property of the person to whom it is addressed when it is deposited in a post office.
I also wish to refer to the provisions of section 55 which read as follows:
Every person who unlawfully opens or wilfully keeps, secretes, delays or detains, or procures, or suffers to be unlawfully opened, kept, secreted, or detained, any mail bag. post letters, or other article of mail, or any receptacle authorized by the Postmaster General for the deposit of mail, whether the same came into the possession of the offender by finding or otherwise, is guilty of an indictable offence.
In order to elaborate further my question of privilege, I should like to quote section 73 (1) dealing with penalties:
Every person who is guilty of an indictable offence under this act is liable, on conviction, to a fine not exceeding three thousand dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both fine and imprisonment.
Subsection (2) reads as follows:
Every person who is guilty of an offence under this act, other than an indictable offence, is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two months or to both fine and imprisonment.
I have here an affidavit relating to the above sections which I have just read and,
with the consent of the house, I would like to table this affidavit.
It reads as follows:
Sherbrooke, October 13, 1964.
I Robert Delisle, a student at Sherbrooke university, after having been sworn on the Holy Gospel, declare and say:
1.	-I have taken note in Hansard of October 8, 1964, of Mr. Gerard Chapdelaine's question of privilege.
2.	In that question of privilege, the member of parliament for Sherbrooke mentions a letter which was sent to me by Mr. Maurice Allard, secretary of Hon. Leon Baleer.
3 I admit I won the Molson trophy at a golf tournament at Sherbrooke university.
4.	I never gave to Mr. Chapdelaine the letter Mr. Allard wrote to me.
5.	I never received the said letter and it was never given to me by anybody.
6.	I conclude that the said letter was intercepted for reasons I am personally unaware of.
7.	As a Canadian citizen, I want to receive the letters addressed to me.
In witness whereof, I have read this document and signed
Robert Delisle.
Sworn before me at Sherbrooke, this 13th day of October, 1964.
Louise Bruneau, C.S.C.
St-Frangois district
Now, Mr. Speaker, on October 8 last the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Chapdelaine) raised in this house a question of privilege concerning the same Robert Delisle, a student at Sherbrooke university, in relation to a letter he never received, according to his affidavit, and which is in the hands of the hon. member for Sherbrooke, as he stated in this house on October 8, 1964, and as reported in the left hand column of page 8864 of Hansard.
In the circumstances I ask the Postmaster General (Mr. Nicholson) to order an investigation into this matter and to make the result known to the house as soon as possible.
Besides, I have also in hand page 8864 of Hansard for October 8, 1964, reporting the statement of the hon. member for Sherbrooke as follows:
I am ready to table this letter so that all the hon. members might see it.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the Postmaster General to order an investigation and to report to the house on the next occasion.

Question of Privilege


Mr. Speaker:: I have listened with the greatest of care to the hon. member for St. Mary, and it seems to me he has given extended publicity to the matter at issue. Inasmuch as there is no request or motion before the house I do not think any question of privilege lies. However, the matter has been aired thoroughly this afternoon, and I am sure that if any steps are necessary they will be taken.


Mr. Guy Marcoux (Quebec-Monlmorency):: Due to the absence of the member for Sherbrooke, I would like to point out a fact of which I am aware. Since the Post Office Department did not seem to know the addressee, it decided to return the letter to the sender at the House of Commons.
Due to the fact that this letter was postmarked from Sherbrooke, I imagine that the Post Office Department thought that it should be returned to the member for Sherbrooke, since no other address appeared on the envelope.
I am sure that when the member for Sherbrooke is present he will explain, but I am personally aware of those particular facts.


Georges-J. Valade: As regards the question of privilege, Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. There is no question of privilege.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of personal privilege. I do not understand Your Honour's ruling that I should not be allowed to air this question, since the hon. member has taken a stand on this matter which he does not know anything about.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. mem-Der has been given considerable leeway this afternoon, and he has consumed a good deal of time in presenting a series of allegations. I do not know whether they are facts or not. I am not concerned with that, but I am concerned with seeing whether there is a question of privilege, and in my opinion there is no question of privilege. The hon. member should not debate that decision unless he wants to appeal it.


Georges-J. Valade: In that event, sir, I rise on a point of order in reference to the question of privilege. I have read certain articles from the postal regulations which make it quite clear that no one has the right to interfere with or
[Mr. Valade.1
hold letters which are directed to other persons. Since the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Georges-J. Valade: On the point of order, sir-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The sections of the law to which the hon. member has made reference speak for themselves. I do not think we need any interpretation in this regard. The only question before the house is whether there is a question of privilege, and in my opinion there is not.


Georges-J. Valade: If Your Honour will allow me, I should like to bring-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Since the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency was allowed to place some information before this house I think I should be allowed to complete my remarks.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member must know the rules as well as the Chair. If, after the Chair has made a decision it is to be argued by every member in turn, we will never get any business done in the house. A decision has been rendered, and I think it is up to the hon. member to accept that decision.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. Aiken: Was the national capital commission consulted
(a)	about the decision not to proceed with the erection of a citizenship and immigration building
(b)	about the decision to lease space in a building for which the excavation had not been commenced?
Hon. J. P. Deschaieleis (Minister of Public
Works): The answer of the national capital commission is in the negative.


STUDENTS' CAMPUS IN GATINEAU PARK
Mr. Martineau: Has the national capital commission deeded to a corporation called "Corporation de la Cite des etudiants de Hull" property for developing a campus in the Gatineau park district and. if so, (a) under what conditions was the property deeded (b) who are the directors of the said corporation?


Hon. J. P. Deschaieleis (Minister of Public Works):: No.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FUND
Mr. Howe (Hamilton: South):
1.	As of this date, what is the financial state of the unemployment insurance fund?
2.	What are its future prospects?


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of Labour):: 1. On September 30, 1964 the unemployment insurance fund showed a credit balance of $37,833,285.54.
2. It is expected that the contributions to the unemployment insurance fund will continue to increase the financial state of the fund until some time in December 1964. From approximately January 1965 during the heavy claims season it is expected that the outgo from the fund will exceed its income.


C.N.R. MASTER AGENCIES AND SATELLITE TERMINALS
Mr. Howe (Wellinglon-: Huron):
1.	How many master agencies and satellite terminals are to be set up under the new express and freight handling service proposed bv the C.N.R.?
2.	Where are these master agencies and satellite
terminals to be located?
3.	What are the names and locations of the stations that will be closed up if this plan is carried forward?


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):: The management of Canadian National Railways advises as follows:
1 and 2. The establishment of master agencies and satellite terminals on system-wide basis is still in the planning stage and it is, therefore, not possible at this time to indicate how many agencies or satellites will be established or where they will be located. At present, there are master agencies in operation at Moncton and Edmonton.
3.	The closing of any station as a result of the foregoing is dependant on approval being obtained from the board of transport commissioners.


ROCKCLIFFE, ONT.-RELOCATION OF SEAPLANE BASE
Mr. Thompson: Where does the Department of Transport expect to relocate the seaplane base presently located at Rockcliffe which is about to be transferred to the Department of Transport from the Department of National Defence?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The department does not plan to relocate the seaplane base at Rockcliffe. It is proposed to make this a civil facility at its present location.
20220-587J
Questions


REPORT OF ONTARIO LABOUR FEDERATION RESPECTING POVERTY
Mr. Howe (Hamilton: South):
1.	Is the government aware of a report by the Ontario federation of labour to the effect that 2,500,000 Canadians are living in destitution and, if so, has a similar study been undertaken by the government?
2.	Has the government considered the establishment of a royal commission to examine and report on the question of poverty in Canada?


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: 1 and 2. The government is aware of the report by the Ontario federation of labour and constantly evolving range of policies and of federal jurisdiction, to develop policies and programs that will eradicate the varied causes of destitution. This has been, and will continue to be, a prominent objective of policies designed to enhance Canadian economic growth, of programs such as those of the area development authority, Atlantic development board and ARDA designed to meet the special problems of particular areas and regions, of programs designed to raise and extend the skills of Canadian workers, and of the broad range of programs, both established and prospective, to improve standards of social welfare, health and housing.
It is equally of concern to the government to assess the effectiveness, in terms of the living standards of all Canadians, of this wide and constantly evolving range of policies and programs in order to identify residual areas of special need. In this sense, the government is engaged in a continuous assessment of the location and causes of economic distress in Canada, and of the measures best suited to its eradication.


BIDS FOR PENITENTIARY CONSTRUCTION, SPRINGHILL, N.S.
Mr. Coales: 1.	How many bids were received for construction of the young offenders penal institution to be constructed at Springhill, Nova Scotia?
2.	What are the names of the firms submitting bids and the amount of the bid in each case?
3.	What is the anticipated date for the initiation of construction on the said young offenders penal institution?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. Six.
2. Foundation Maritime Limited, Halifax,
N.S., $8,940,000; Modern Construction Limited, Moncton, N.B. $9,316,600; Fraser Brace Engineering Co. Ltd., Montreal, P.Q., $9,359,000; Argo Construction Limited, Montreal, P.Q., $9,374,000; Thomas Fuller Construction

Questions
Co., Ottawa, Ont., $9,428,000; Atlas Construction Co. Ltd., Fredericton, N.B., $9,750,000.
3. A recommendation for contract award is being submitted to treasury board. Construction will commence shortly after authority has been received.


'C.B.C. BROADCAST ON CONSERVATIVE CONFERENCE
Mr. Irvine: 1.	Were there any telephone conversations between the Prime Minister and Mr. Norman DePoe of the C.B.C. on September 9 or 10, 1964, while the latter was in Fredericton, New Brunswick?
2.	Did the C.B.C. receive any complaints from any member of the federal government concerning the broadcast in connection with the national Conservative conference on Canadian goals?


Mr. J. B. Stewart (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, question 2,075 is in two parts; and the answer to each of those parts is in the negative.


COMPLAINTS RESPECTING MAIL SERVICE, HAMILTON, ONT.
Mr. Howe (Hamilton South): Has the Hamilton, Ontario post office received complaints regarding missorting and delayed delivery of mail and, if so, what action has been taken?


Hon. J. R. Nicholson (Postmaster General):: No complaints of missorting. Three complaints of delay: (a) To mail from Montreal. Explained to the satisfaction of the patron,
(b)	To a local letter. No evidence found that postal service failed in its responsibility, (c) To mail from the United States. Found to be due to diversion for customs examination. Problem reviewed by customs and postal officials and explained to patron.


EXPERIMENTAL SPRAYING FOR SPRUCE BUDWORM CONTROL
Mr. Howe (Hamilton South): 1.	What was the role of the federal government in the experimental spraying of 160,000 acres in New Brunswick with phosphamidon for spruce budworm control?
2.	Why was a much smaller area not chosen for experimental spraying?
Hon Maurice Sauve (Minister of Forestry):
1. The spraying of 160,000 acres in New Brunswick with phosphamidon in 1964 was carried out as part of the provincial opera-
[Mr. Deschatelets.l
tional program of Forest Protection Limited, the crown company charged with control operations against the spruce budworm in that province. Their decision to employ phosphamidon on an operational scale was reviewed and accepted by the interdepartmental committee on forest spraying in November 1963 with members representing fisheries interests expressing their strong desire to have phosphamidon used for the entire spray program for approximately 2.4 million acres because of its recognized low toxicity to fish. The 160,000 acres treated with phosphamidon were selected to include the major fish spawning streams within the spray program and to cover certain areas where a developing in-sistance of spruce budworm populations to D.D.T. was known to exist. Cost considerations prevented the broader use of this material which had been under study by the Department of Forestry for several years in its concerted search for alternative material to D.D.T. that would produce a desirable degree of budworm control with reduced effects on fish and also wildlife. Following laboratory toxicity trials against the budworm and fish in 1960 and 1961, experimental aerial applications were made in 1962 to several plots in New Brunswick involving about 600 acres of forest. The results were encouraging and prompted an operational test on about 40,000 acres in 1963. Again the results were satisfactory and formed the basis of the Department of Forestry's recommendation prior to the 1964 spray program that phosphamidon might be used with benefit on areas where the fish hazard was high or where budworm resistance to D.D.T. was apparent.
2. The area of 160,000 acres was decided upon by Forest Protection Limited as the minimum necessary to cover areas of high fish hazard and of developing budworm resistance to D.D.T.


TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT SHIPS, WEST COAST
Mr. Basford: What are the names, sizes, headquarters port and intended purpose, or use, of all Department of Transport motorized ships of 20 feet over-all length or more, stationed on the west coast?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The following Department of Transport vessels are stationed on the British Columbia coast and use the facilities of the Victoria and Prince Rupert marine agencies as supply and support bases as required:

Questions
Ship	Length	Gross tonnage	FunctionCarnsell	224'	2,022	Full icebreaker.Estevan	200'	1,161 (	Lighthouse supply andSir James Douglas	150'	730)	buoy vessels.Alexander Mackenzie	150'	556 gross	Lighthouse supply and buoy vessel.Katherine B	43'	24 gross	Agency tender.Skidegate	70'	136 gross	Agency tender.St. Catherines	283'	1,895 gross	Weather ship.Stonetown	283'	1,883 gross	Weather ship.St. Stephens	283'	1,890 gross	Weather ship.Ready	95'	153 gross	Search and rescue cutter.Racer	95'	153 gross	Search and rescue cutter.Bamfield	33'	11 gross	Shore based lifeboat.Tofino	33'	11 gross	Shore based lifeboat.Mallard	40'	8 gross	Search and rescue cutter.Moorhen	40'	8 gross	Search and rescue cutter.Canada Pilot No. 20	37'	16 gross	Pilot boat.Canada Pilot No. 22	57'	40 gross	Pilot boat.Canada Pilot No. 24	41'	18 gross	Pilot boat.


BUDGETS AND EXPENDITURES, NATIONAL DEFENCE DEPARTMENT
Mr. Priliie: 1.	What was the total amount of the budgets of the Department of National Defence for the fiscal years 1949-50 to 1963-64 inclusive?
2,	What was the total amount of actual expenditures by the Department of National Defence for the fiscal years 1949-50 to 1963-64 inclusive?


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of National Defence):: 1 and 2. Information requested for the years 1949-50 to 1962-63 has already been made available in the official publication "Public Accounts of Canada" issued by the Department of Finance. In so far as the year 1963-64 is concerned the following figures are from official departmental records: Appropriation, $1,728,882,707; expenditure, $1,683,471,003.


SAINT JOHN, N.B., POST OFFICE
Mr. Bell: 1.	Have any surveys been conducted regarding a new post office in Saint John, N.B. and, if so, with what result?
2.	Has it been decided to rebuild on the present site or in the outskirts of the city?
Hon. J. P. Deschatelets (Minisier of Public
Works): 1. No special survey has been conducted regarding a new post office building. Examination of the post office situation has resulted in some recent adjustments of space in the present post office. No decision can be
made with respect to a new building until the question of road and railway relocation has been determined by the municipal and railroad authorities.
2. Answered by No. 1.


'SALE OF H.M.C.S. &quot;PREVOST&quot;, LONDON, ONT.
Mr. Irvine: 1.	What bids were received, and for what amounts, by the war assets disposal corporation for the properties formerly known as H.M.C.S. Prevost, London, Ontario?
2.	Who was the ultimate purchaser?


Hon. C. M. Drury (Minister of Industry):: In so far Crown Assets Disposal Corporation is concerned, the answer is as follows:
1.	The only offer received by Crown Assets Disposal Corporation on the former H.M.C.S. Prevost property at Carling and Richmond streets, in London, Ontario as a result of four advertisements in the London newspaper, was from Carlonne Holdings Limited, of London, in the amount of $162,010.
2.	Carlonne Holdings Limited.


REQUESTS FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH GRANTS
Mr. Grafftey: 1.	What was the total amount of grants requested this year by the Canadian medical research council for basic research in Canada?
2.	What portion of the amount requested by the Canadian medical research council this year was actually granted by the federal government?

Questions


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: In so far as the national research council is concerned, the answer is as follows:
1.	For the year 1964-65 the medical research council requested an appropriation of $7,000,000 of which $5,500,000 was to be allocated to grants in aid of research.
2.	The medical research council estimates for 1964-65 have not yet been passed by parliament. To date $4,522,125 of the funds made available to the council through interim supply have been spent on grants in aid of research.


REPAIRS TO RETAINING WALL, PARRSBORO, N.S.
Mr. Coates: 1.	How many firms submitted tenders for repairs to the retaining wall at Parrsboro, N.S.?
2.	What are the names of the firms and the amount of each tender submitted and was the contract awarded to the lowest bidder?
3.	Is the federal government assuming full responsibility for the repairs to the retaining wall?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: 1. One.
2.	Mr. A. I. Cochrane, Parrsboro, N.S., $3,846. Contract awarded to A. I. Cochrane at reduced price of $3,445.50.
3.	The federal government is assuming responsibility for payment of the cost of these repairs.


POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION, TASCHEREAU, PQ.
Mr. Laprise: Will a post office be constructed shortly at Tas-chereau, Chapleau county and. if so (a) what lots have been considered for such construction <b) what lots have been purchased (c) who owned these lots (d) what was the price paid for the lots (e) when will tenders be called for the construction of the said post office?

Hon. J. P. Deschatelets (Minister of Public
Works): It is proposed to construct a standard plan post office at Taschereau during the coming winter of 1964-65, subject to funds being available.
(a)	The following lots have been considered for such construction: (i) Part of lot No. 952 on Privat avenue owned by C.N.R. (ii) Parts of lots No. 656 and No. 657 on Privat avenue owned by Francois Caouette Inc. (iii) A parcel of land with a 50' frontage located south of the railway owned by Mr. Marcel Audet. (iv) Lots No. 7 and No. 8 of block No. 2 owned by Mrs. Wellie Bergeron.
(b)	Part of lot No. 925 on Privat avenue, measuring approximately 70' X 100'.

(c)	Canadian National Railways.
(d)	$500.
(e)	Tenders for this project are expected to be called late this fall.


STATUS OF SOUTH SASKATCHEWAN REGIMENT
Mr. Soufham: 1.	Have representations been made to the federal government by various interested bodies in Saskatchewan. and in particular from the city of Este-van, Saskatchewan, for the retention of the South Saskatchewan regiment?
2.	Has the Minister of National Defence, or his officials, come to a conclusion on the future status of this famous regiment?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: 1. No.
2. Not yet.


IMPORTATION OF CHARLOAIS SEMEN
Mr. Horner (Jasper-: Edson):
1.	Has any change been made in the past 12 months on the importation of Charloais semen into Canada from France and, if so, what are the new regulations?
2.	If not, what effect will the new U.S. regulations have on Charloais breeders in Canada?


Hon. Harry W. Hays (Minister of Agriculture):: 1. No change has been made in the past 12 months on the importation of Charloais semen from France.
2. There have been no recent changes in the United States regulations governing the import of semen from France. The department is working jointly with the United States on possible regulation changes and, if and when changes come into effect, it is intended both Canadian and United States regulations will be uniform.



RETIRED OFFICERS EMPLOYED WITH FIRMS SUPPLYING DEFENCE MATERIAL

['No R.C.N. personnel were transferred from Halifax to guard arms depots in the province of Quebec during the royal visit.']
Paul Theodore Hellyer: 1. No.
2 and 3. Not applicable.
4.	The government does not plan to take steps for this purpose.



Mr. Coates: Why were 50 members of the Royal Canadian Navy transferred from Halifax to guard arms depots in the province of Quebec during the royal visit?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: No R.C.N. personnel were transferred from Halifax to guard arms depots in the province of Quebec during the royal visit.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Orlikow: 1.	When did the Post Office Department adopt its policy of disciplinary penalties for postal employees?
2.	What are the disciplinary penalties for each offence?
3.	Are the penalties the same for all postal employees in every part of Canada?
4.	Who decides on the nature of the penalties?
5.	Were the postal employees and their organizations consulted about these penalties?
6.	Did they agree to this type of penalty?
7.	Is there any other government department following the policy of imposing this type of penalty on employees whose work is unsatisfactory?
Return tabled.


ROYAL VISIT TO OTTAWA-ACCREDITED PHOTO AGENCIES
Mr. McCutcheon: 1.	On the occasion of Her Majesty's Ottawa visit what Canadian news or photo agencies were accredited to the tour to photograph the participation of our armed forces?
2.	Were units of any foreign or international news or photo agencies accredited for this purpose and, if so. who were they?
Return tabled.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS

John B. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, motions Nos. 169, 174 and 175 are acceptable to the government. Motion 171 is acceptable subject to the usual reservation concerning the consent of the province. Will Your Honour call motions Nos. 172, 173 and 176? I ask that motion 170 be allowed to stand.
Motions for Papers



PROTEST RESPECTING C.B.C. BROADCAST CONCERNING HAL BANKS

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 169-Mr. Coates:
That an order of the house do issue 'or a copy of a telegram dated October 4, 5 or 6, sent by the Minister of Justice, or by anyone on his behalf, to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation complaining about the program which featured his views on Hal Banks.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 171-Mr. Howard:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the government or any department, agency or branch thereof and any other person, group, organization or government since January 1, 1964, relating to customs service at Atlin, B.C.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 172-Mr. Knowles (for Mr. Howard):
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all agreements entered into pursuant to section 33 of the government wharves regulations.
Hon. G. J. Mcllraith (Acting Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, I understand that the hon. member is agreeable to having this order limited to the agreements respecting floats on the Pacific coast, and with that understanding there is no objection to the motion passing.


Mr. Knowles:: That was agreed to by the hon. member.


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


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 173-Mr. Knowles (for Mr. Howard):
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all exemptions granted pursuant to section 28(2) of the government wharves regulations.
Hon. G. J. Mcllraith (Acting Minister of
Transport): Mr. Speaker, no exemptions have been granted pursuant to section 28 (2) of the government wharves regulations, and I understand that the hon. member in whose name the motion stands has been so advised. I would accordingly ask that this motion be dropped.
9278	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry
Stanley Howard Knowles: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: Motion dropped.



BREAKWATER AND HARBOUR FACILITIES, PORT SIMPSON, B.C.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 174
Mr. Howard:: That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, telegrams or other documents exchanged between the government or any agency or branch thereof and any person, group, or organization regarding the question of a breakwater and/or harbour facilities at Port Simpson, B.C. since January 1, 1963.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNMENT WHARVES REGULATIONS Motion No. 175-Mr. Howard:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all agreements entered into between the government or any department, agency or branch thereof and any other person, group, organization or government relating to the administration of the government wharves regulations or the collection of wharfage fees thereunder except on agreement made pursuant to section 33 of the said regulations.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 176-Mr. Langlois:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and letters exchanged between the Minister of Public Works, the Postmaster General and the municipality of Notre Dame de la Guadeloupe in the constituency of Megantic, concerning the construction of a post office and the acquisition of land for this purpose, since January 1, 1958.
Some hon. Members:: Stand.


Mr. Speaker:: Motion stands.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, with regard to the request of hon. members that motion 176 stand, may I say I was prepared to deal with it today and if it is going to stand I would ask that it stand for two weeks.


Mr. Speaker:: Stands for two weeks.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Minister of Justice whether he is now in a


position to advise the house what the government intends to do in connection with an amendment to the Criminal Code relative to hate literature. A spate of this literature of a scurrilous nature has been distributed in the last few days. The Canadian Jewish News stated in a recent issue it had been advised that legislation had been prepared and was ready for presentation to the house. Months have gone by while this matter has been studied. Would the minister take the house into his confidence now and tell the house whether any action is going to be taken in this connection?


Hon. Guy Favreau (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, in answer to the question I am pleased to report that on Monday the Prime Minister received a joint delegation of the Canadian Jewish congress and the Canadian Zionist movement, I believe it is called, and I had the honour of attending that meeting, at which further submissions were made in relation to hate literature. We repeated to the congress, and to the other members of the delegation, that the matter was still under active study in the department and we would consider immediately the further representations that had been made. It is my view that very shortly I will be in a position to submit recommendations to the government in connection with this subject.


Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington South):: May
I ask a supplementary question with regard to the distribution of hate literature. I should like to address it to the Postmaster General. The other day he intimated that a board of review would be held at which a person by the name of Stanley was to appear. The minister stated he would advise the house when and where this meeting would be held and if the public were to be admitted.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: I am not in a position as yet to make a report, but I assure my hon. friend it will not be long delayed.



LEGISLATION TO DEAL WITH FRAUDULENT BANKRUPTCIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Thomas M. Bell (Saint John-Albert):: should like to address a question to the Minister of Justice in connection with new legislation to be introduced by his department. Is the minister in a position to give the house any information about possible bankruptcy legislation, particularly in view of the announcement by the solicitor general in

Quebec about an investigation into the whole bankruptcy situation?
Hon, Guy Favreau (Minister of Justice): I
have told the house already that the question of bankruptcy is being studied on a very broad basis and at the same time, within that broad framework, particular phases of the question are being studied. There will be a short bill introduced within a few weeks, and I shall be in a position to report to the house further at a later date as to the status of the study with regard to the broader scope of the act.



INQUIRIES OF THE MINISTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: I should like to address a question to the Prime Minister. In view of a statement made in Montreal yesterday by the premier of Saskatchewan to the effect that under certain circumstances it may be necessary for him to arrange to have his province join the United States, I wonder if the Prime Minister is making any arrangements for overflight rights for Air Canada or other necessary travel arrangements, so that Canadians who travel from Manitoba to Alberta might be able to do so without going via the Northwest Territories?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, the circumstances are so hypothetical that I do not believe I need to comment on them, except to say I am quite sure Saskatchewan will never become a Polish corridor.


Guy Marcoux: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a short question to the Minister of Finance.
Does the government intend to follow the course taken by French minister of finance, Mr. Valery Giscard d'Estaing, who is going to table a bill to make mandatory the balancing of the state's budget and who will entrust to government agencies the task of providing the credits required for the improvement of the nation's economy?


Hon. Waller L. Gordon (Minister of Finance):: No, Mr. Speaker.
Inquiries of the Ministry EXTERNAL AFFAIRS



CONGO-INQUIRY AS TO CANADIANS HELD AS HOSTAGES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. A large number of foreign nationals are being held by the rebel regime in Stanleyville as hostages, and amongst this group are a number of Canadians. I know of one or two who have not been heard from since July 30. Does the minister have any information for the house regarding Canadian nationals being held in that part of the Congo?


Hon. Paul Marlin (Secretary of Stale for External Affairs):: I have been asked about this matter several times. I must say that the situation is a serious one. There are 800 Europeans in the area, including 20 Canadians, who are being held as hostages. On September 25 a Swiss plane bearing international Red Cross markings was permitted to land at Stanleyville with much needed medical supplies and food. It was hoped at that time that evacuation of women and children by the Red Cross plane might be permitted, but the rebel authorities refused. The international Red Cross is continuing its negotiations, but the head of the rebel organization is having difficulty in convincing the extremists in his army to agree to plans for evacuation.
We have today made some suggestions to certain governments and I may have something more to say about this later. But I must agree that the situation is, regrettably, a serious one.



RECOGNITION OF QUEBEC DELEGATION IN PARIS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Heward Graff  ley@Brome-Missisquoi: I should like to direct my question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs and ask him whether there has been any change respecting the status of the Quebec office in Paris since the hon. gentleman, on October 19, confirmed the intervention of his department to obtain from the government of France certain privileges and immunities for the agent of Quebec. Would the minister confirm reports that Premier Lesage expects to obtain official recognition of a Quebec consulate in Paris?

Inquiries of the Ministry


Paul Joseph James Martin: I know of no situation such as that implied in the last part of the hon. member's question. The government of Canada has asked the government of France to accord to Quebec house in Paris the same privileges that are accorded by the government of Britain to Ontario house and to Quebec house in London. It is not a question of a consulate being set up by the government of Quebec. This is a request made by the government of Canada to the government of France with regard to according to Quebec house in France the same privileges that are accorded to Quebec house in London.
The hon. member may possibly have misunderstood the announcement of the establishment of consulate service by the government of Canada at Bordeaux and Marseilles. That announcement may have provoked his question.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister cannot read everything that appears in the press; I would not expect that. But has there been no request by the government of Quebec for the extension of consular privileges other than the privileges of which he spoke a moment ago? In other words, has there been any request for the granting to the province of Quebec a consulate in France, at the instance of Premier Lesage?


Paul Joseph James Martin: No, Mr. Speaker. [Translation]


Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapointe):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Secretary of State for External Affairs.
Could the minister tell us whether he has received a reply to this request whereby the Canadian government asked France to grant to Quebec the same privileges that London has granted to the various provinces and was this reply in the affirmative?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, we have not received a definite reply through our ambassador yet, but we expect one any day now.



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Walter Lockhart Gordon: I was asked two questions yester-
[Mr. Grafftey.l

day. Perhaps I might reply first to the question of the Leader of the Opposition, who inquired:
-whether it is a fact that the United States borrowed moneys from the international monetary fund within the last few days in order to lend Canada funds needed to repay the Canadian account with that fund.
The simple answer to this question would be no. However, I should like to reply more fully.
On September 30 I stated that the Canadian government had repaid a further $50 million U.S. to the international monetary fund, reducing to $57.2 million U.S. the remaining Canadian debt to the fund. The original borrowing in June, 1962 was for $300 million U.S.
On the same day the United States for its own purposes borrowed $100 million U.S. from the fund. The currencies borrowed by the United States included the equivalent of $25 million U.S. in Netherlands guilders and $25 million U.S. in Deutsche marks. Canada used its holdings of U.S. dollars to purchase these currencies from the United States, and used the currencies thus acquired to repay the fund.
I should like to explain briefly the reason for following this procedure. Canada holds most of its reserves in the form of U.S. dollars, but the fund cannot at the present time accept U.S. dollars in repayment of outstanding debts because the fund's holdings of U.S. dollars are in excess of 75 per cent of the United States quota. Therefore, to repay the fund, Canada had to use currencies other than U.S. dollars. We could obtain these currencies either by purchasing them in the open market or by purchasing them from the United States in the manner I have just described. The latter alternative was chosen because it provided more effective support to the United States balance of payments and this, of course, would not in any way increase the cost to us.



BANK OF CANADA COMMITMENT UNDER AGREEMENT WITH U.K. GOVERNMENT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct my question to the Minister of Finance. Could he make the statement he promised us for today respecting the loans made by the Bank of Canada to England?

tText]


Walter Lockhart Gordon: In reply to the question asked by the hon. member for Lapointe I would say that in September of this year the Bank of Canada, in conjunction with a number of other central banks, entered into an arrangement with the Bank of England to place a short term credit facility at their disposal to help protect sterling against speculative pressures that might arise. These arrangements were made before the British election, and no new arrangements have been entered into since. Some use was made by the Bank of England of this facility before the British election.
This arrangement with the Bank of England is similar in nature to those which have been made on several occasions among central banks over the last few years in support of various currencies which might at the time have been open to some speculative pressures in the exchange markets. In June 1962, for instance, the Bank of Canada entered into such an arrangement with the federal reserve system and with the Bank of England in support of the Canadian dollar.
The British authorities have not yet announced the amount of the recent new standby arrangements made by the Bank of England or the extent to which the facilities have been used. As I have already said in the house, I do not think there would be any advantage in disclosing here the details of arrangements made on the initiative of another country. Such an announcement should obviously come from the other country concerned. The rates of interest applicable under these arrangements have not yet been published by the parties to them, but I am informed they are based on prevailing market rates.
May I say again that having in mind the support accorded to Canada by the United Kingdom and others when it was needed, it is a pleasure to have been able to reciprocate by means of these arrangements, which were initiated under the previous British government and are being continued under the present British government.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Finance.
Could he tell us whether interest was charged to the Bank of England for those sums recently made available to it, although we do not know what they amount to?
20220-588J
Inquiries of the Ministry


Walter Lockhart Gordon: Yes, Mr. Speaker; to the extent that these credits are drawn on, there will be an interest charge.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, may we know what rate of interest the Bank of Canada asks from the Bank of England?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: I have just said that the particulars have not yet been published, and I think it would be preferable-


Some hon. Members:: Why?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: May I finish? I think it would be preferable that this whole arrangement should be made public by the country which initiated the arrangement, that is by the United Kingdom. The same courtesy was extended to Canada when the shoe was on the other foot.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, my question is intended for the Minister of Labour and I feel it is both very urgent and serious.
Is the Minister of Labour aware of certain activities of the longshoremen's international union in Montreal which led to the suspension of three longshoremen from September 24, 1964 to December 31, 1965, because they reportedly inquired about the state of their pension fund?
Since those individuals, heads of large families, do not draw any unemployment insurance benefits and are without income, could the minister investigate and see to it that in the meantime they draw unemployment insurance benefits?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, this matter was raised some time ago by the hon. member for Lapointe. I have given an explanation of the situation with respect to the rights of these longshoremen, as I understand it, under the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act, to unemployment insurance.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Georges-J. Valade: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that these persons have not received any unemployment insurance since September 24. I understand these cases are being investigated by the unemployment insurance commission, but would the minister make sure that these people receive unemployment insurance; because they have no other means of support.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: It is not possible for me to do that, Mr. Speaker, because under the law the insurance officer in the first place, and later the board of referees, is responsible for determining the eligibility of workers to benefits under the act. As I suggested earlier, if the insurance officer has rejected a claim, it ought to go forward to the board of referees for further adjudication.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerard Laprise (Chapleau):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of Agriculture, but since he is away I shall put it to the right hon. Prime Minister.
Has the government taken action or will it take any to assist farmers in the Abitibi and Temiscamingue areas as a result of the serious damages caused by 69 consecutive days of rain in those areas since the end of July?


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



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. L. Chatterion (Esquimalt-Saanich):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Postmaster General in his responsibility for national housing. Has the minister received a petition bearing the names of over 600 Fraser-view residents requesting a public hearing?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, I have received a petition. I cannot say whether there are 600 signatures on it-I doubt that there are-but there are a great many signatures asking for a public hearing. I have said before I do not believe that, under the circumstances of this case and in view of the long delay, a public hearing is called for.


George Louis Chatterton: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I presume the minister has received the first petition and the second petition is on its way. In view of the statement by the minister as reported at page 9142 of Hansard, that only some 70 people are still complaining, would the minister now, since more than half the residents have complained, reconsider his decision and arrange for a public hearing so the matter can be thoroughly aired?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, the answer is briefly no, but I would supplement it by saying that the petition to which I believe the hon. member refers, which has several signatures, says these people have signed the new agreements, and I can confirm that they have also paid the increased rents. They say that notwithstanding the fact that they signed these agreements, they only did so because they had received notice that they would be evicted if they did not.
I have already told the house that notices to that effect went out several weeks ago, and that this was a legal requirement that had to be followed. We believe the rents are fair; they are not unreasonable. These people are changing their minds; they are now objecting to paying the increased rents. A great many people have that objection, but I certainly sae no reason for a public inquiry in this case just because people have subsequently changed their minds.


George Louis Chatterton: A supplementary question. Would the minister not agree that in view of the fact that more than half the residents now indicate they do not agree with the agreements they made-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


George Louis Chatterton: -or are not satisfied, there should be a public hearing?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, at the risk of being repetitious I would say that they do not say this in the petition. They say they would prefer not to have increased rents. The petition is to that effect. Then they say they would like a public hearing.



TRANSPORTATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerald A. Regan (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Acting Minister of Transport. Can the minister

now report on the position of the board of transport commissioners regarding the D.A.R. passenger train cancellation?


Mr. Maclnnis:: We got the answer to that yesterday.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker-


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.
How is it that the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Regan) can ask a question relating to the cancellation of trains and his question is allowed whereas the other day the hon. member for Compton-Frontenac (Mr. Latu-lippe) asked a question relating to the same cancellations as the hon. member and, in the case of the member for Compton-Frontenac, the matter was somewhat urgent as the cancellation could be put into effect very shortly, his question was ruled out of order and he was told to put it on the order paper?
Are questions from the Liberal party accepted and those from other parties refused?


Mr. Speaker:: There is obviously no question of privilege here. However, perhaps the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Regan) would like to say something. My understanding of the two questions was that they were completely different; the first question, asked by one of the hon. members to my left, required a detailed answer concerning a small section of railway between cities A and B, and I understand the second question had to do with the general principle.


Gerald Augustine Regan: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I submit also that there is urgency in this matter, inasmuch as the D.A.R. service was to have been curtailed at the end of this week. I also understand the minister is in a position to make a brief statement in this regard.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Gerald Augustine Regan: If I can make myself heard over the noise from the opposite side of the house-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. In order to settle the matter, would the hon. member put his question on the order paper.


Mr. Lambert:: It was a stooge question, anyway.


Mr. Winch:: It was decided two days ago by transport, and you know it.
Inquiries of the Ministry CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION



STUDY OF EXTENSION OF TELEVISION SERVICE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Robert Simpson (Churchill):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Secretary of State whether he is now in a position to answer the question which I directed to him through his parliamentary secretary on October 6, regarding a study of the extension of C.B.C. television services.


Hon. Maurice Lamonlagne (Secretary of Slate):: Mr. Speaker, as my hon. friend might recall, the decision with regard to extension of service or alternative service will not be made until the advisory committee on broadcasting presents its report, which I hope will be early in 1965.


Robert Simpson: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. The question I asked was in two parts. I asked whether the government had made a request to the C.B.C. for an up to date study; and if they have not, would they consider doing so at this time, namely asking the C.B.C. for an up to date study regarding the extension of television services to the unserviced parts of Canada?


Maurice Lamontagne: I am quite sure that the
C.B.C. is giving very active consideration to this very important matter and will present its views to the advisory committee.



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Reid Scott (Danforth):: Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration whether he has completed the investigation he has been making for the last couple of weeks into the status of the people employed by the newspapers in Toronto in connection with the strike, and in particular the status of the six individuals who are apparently here without status.
I wonder whether we could have a report on that.


Hon. Rene Tremblay (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, in my absence my parliamentary secretary made a statement to the house on the problem concerning the group of people who came to Canada or were allowed to work for the news-

Inquiries of the Ministry papers which were involved in a strike in Toronto.
I know the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) inquired more specifically about the status of six persons, and I have yet to receive the details of the inquiry carried out in Toronto. I hope to receive them within the next few days, at which time I will be pleased to answer the question of the hon. member.

STATEMENT ON REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF CASES OF GREEK SEAMEN On the orders of the day:


René Tremblay: Mr. Speaker, while I am on my feet I should like to give an answer to the Leader of the Opposition who, on October 8 and again on October 14 inquired concerning the government's attitude toward deserting seamen. He made specific reference to a number of Greek seamen in Toronto now awaiting hearing of their appeals from convictions handed down by the courts for illegal entry to Canada.
Considerable publicity has been given to the subject of ship deserters, both in the house and in the press, during the past several months, and the problem and difficulties attendant to this question have occupied my department's attention for an even lengthier period. In our review of these problems one point became abundantly clear at the outset; that is that there has been an alarming increase among certain groups of the resort to this particular means of gaining entry to Canada. They are doing so in the hope that even if they are caught they will be able to bring enough public pressure to bear to allow them to remain in this country. These people, the majority of whom are otherwise inadmissible as immigrants, are knowingly and purposely breaking the law, and if this practice were to go unchecked it would only result in utter chaos and a complete disregard for Canadian law.
When discussing the cases referred to by the Leader of the Opposition it must be remembered that there are two separate and distinct issues involved here. In the first instance, because of their actions these persons became the subject of immigration inquiries under the Immigration Act, and were properly ordered deported under section 19 (1) (e) (x) of the act for having remained in Canada without the permission of an immigration officer after the departure of their vessels. In very exceptional cases where the strongest compassionate grounds exist, and where the fullest 

co-operation has been forthcoming, I have directed that the person might be allowed to remain in this country to see how he progresses. I would also like to make it clear, however, that where deportation has taken place this has not ruled out the possibility of the individual being permitted to come forward again at some future date as a legal immigrant in the normal way if he can comply with all other immigration requirements.
As to what may be the outcome of the specific cases referred to by the Leader of the Opposition, it is not possible to say just what action may eventually be taken in their cases. All I can say at the moment is that they will be examined carefully in the light of the policy considerations I have set out above. The specific case of Ilias Vitsas is no different than any of the others, and this man's case will also be carefully reviewed under this policy.
The second issue involved in these cases is that by reason of their method of gaining entry to Canada they have broken the law, and like anyone else who does not adhere to the laws of Canada they become liable for arraignment by the responsible police authorities before the competent courts of the land. It would be inappropriate for me, of course, to offer any comments whatever concerning the action taken or the decisions reached by the courts in these cases.
Regarding the right hon. gentleman's inquiry concerning any direction given to the government's counsel in these cases, I would just like to confirm the position I took earlier in this respect, that no instructions were issued to counsel by either officials of my department or the Department of Justice as to the degree of vigour with which these cases were to be pressed. The role of the prosecuting counsel in these cases was no different than it is in any other court proceeding, and that is to pursue the prosecution only to the point required in the interests of simple justice.



PROCEDURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. A. Olson (Medicine Hat):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to call the attention of the house to a correction appearing in Votes and Proceedings for Tuesday, October 20. It relates to the eleventh report of the special committee on procedure and organiza-

tion, concurred in on Monday, October 19. The report was first printed, and without error, in Votes and Proceedings for Wednesday, October 7. Unfortunately, however, when reprinted on Monday, October 19, a transposition of certain lines occurred, and this has now been corrected by the erratum following page 813 of Votes and Proceedings for yesterday. I draw this to the attention of hon. members because it is part of an important report concurred in by the house.



ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Martineau (Poniiac-Temiscamingue):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. A few weeks ago the minister announced that he was going to make a statement concerning the investigation now being carried out with regard to the R.C.M.P. in Montreal. Can the minister tell us if this investigation has now been completed and what changes have been made as a result of the said investigation?


Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, all the proceedings have not yet been completed in this regard.


Paul Raymond Martineau: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.
Was this followed by changes in the high command of the R.C.M.P. in Montreal?


Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, changes have been made in the high command of the R.C.M.P. at Montreal and they were announced in the press. I must say, however, that they should not be attributed to the results of the investigation because, as I have already pointed out, it will only be proper to make comments on the investigation as such when all proceedings have been completed.



INVESTIGATION INTO ALLEGATIONS OF POLICE BRUTALITY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Minister of Justice a question. Last Friday he said he expected to receive fairly soon a report regarding police activities in Quebec city during Her Majesty's recent visit. I want to ask the minister whether he has yet received such a report and, if not, when he does receive it will it be made public?
Supply-Veterans Affairs


Guy Favreau: No,
Mr. Speaker, I have not yet received the report; but I might add that today I once more asked that it be forwarded to me promptly.
Mr. Robert Muir (Cape Breton North and
Victoria): Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I regret to interrupt, but we are already four minutes overdue. Question time was up at 3.25 p.m., but on account of the long statement made a few moments ago I thought three or four minutes extra should be granted as a bonus. But we are over the half hour period.


Mr. Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria):: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the difficulties with which you are confronted, but I had been attempting to get the floor for some time before you called orders of the day. I thought we were going to continue on orders of the day, so I sat down; and then you called on the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam.


Mr. Speaker:: There is a slight misstatement there. I did not call on the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam; he took the floor.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I apologize. I had forgotten it was Wednesday and I had not realized that time was up. I apologize to the hon. member.

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



DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration, $6,491,400.
Mr. Teillel:: Mr. Chairman, it is not my
intention to make a statement at this time because the estimates of the department have, of course, been thoroughly examined by the standing committee on veterans affairs. I only want to say that I think I should put on the record the fact that I am sure all members of this committee will join with me in expressing our highest commendation for the very efficient and cooperative manner in which the estimates were dealt with in that committee. Perhaps I should also put on the records of the house the resolution moved by the hon. member for Kootenay West in that committee, which is as follows;
I would like to move that this committee express its appreciation of the clear, concise and informative

Supply-Veterans Affairs way in which the deputy minister and other officials have answered questions during this hearing.
I should like to add my commendation to that remark.
Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to go any further at this moment, because as I said the estimates were thoroughly dealt with in the committee. I will of course answer any questions that are asked during our examination of the estimates this afternoon.


Mr. Fleming (Okanagan-Revelsloke):: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the fact that the estimates were dealt with quite thoroughly by the committee, but I did anticipate that the minister would make a statement about government policy in respect of veterans affairs at this time. Simply because these estimates were considered thoroughly by a committee does not in itself relieve the minister from his responsibility to indicate on the floor of this chamber, at the beginning of a consideration here of his estimates, what government policy is in respect of veterans affairs. I think the minister should indicate what legislation he has in mind for the veterans of this country. The minister has given us no indication in that regard this afternoon, the first opportunity we have had for a general discussion.
The minister has not satisfied me, nor presumably other members on this side of the house, by simply suggesting that because these estimates were considered thoroughly by a committee it is not necessary for him to make a further statement here. This is the forum in which the government has the opportunity to outline policy in respect of major questions, such as veterans affairs, and the forum in which we have a responsibility to listen and to commend or criticize those policies. I hope that at some later time the minister will consider what I have said in this regard and give us an outline of the government's intentions.
When questions were asked during the committee meetings about legislation or review of legislation in respect of veterans affairs, the minister said he hoped that the government's intentions in respect of this legislation would be introduced in the house by the end of this month or early next month. I am sure the minister must realize, as we do, that the members of this committee are very limited in their approach to this important subject without having in their minds some idea of government policy.
On December 10, 1963, the third report of the standing committee on veterans affairs
[Mr. Teillet.l

was presented to this house. It contained a number of recommendations which called for legislative action. As yet we have not seen evidence of any action of that kind. At this time we can only hope that there will be something done in the way of legislation in respect of veterans affairs. The minister said that there would be some legislation of this kind introduced. I think it would help us in our consideration of these estimates to know what that legislation is.
A period of ten or 11 months has elapsed since that committee report was received by the house. Surely that is sufficient time for the minister to make a review of the veterans legislation and consider the steps which ought to be taken in respect of the recommendations of that committee. Surely the minister has had time to consider the representations that I am sure he has received during that period of time. Obviously there is necessity for a review and revision of veterans legislation. The minister did not enlighten us in this regard by his statement this afternoon. As a result, I think we must consider the recommendations contained in the report of the veterans affairs committee, keeping in mind some of the changes which have occurred since that time. Many of the difficulties which were discussed by the committee have not been sufficiently covered by the minister today.
I should like to refer to two aspects of veterans affairs legislation which were not the subject of recommendations contained in the report to which I have made reference, and I refer to veterans allowances and disability pensions. In view of the substantial increase in the cost of living during the past year, and the various representations which I am sure have been made to the minister and the government-certainly many members of this house have received representations-what consideration is being given to the difficulties being encountered by recipients of war veterans allowances and disability pensions? These recipients are now realizing that their present levels of pensions and allowances are not adequate. We do not know what the government's intention is in this regard. Nothing has appeared on the order paper which would give us an indication. We have been assured that when the legislation does appear on the order paper it will meet all our requirements, but we are not absolutely sure that that is an accurate statement.
In view of the increase in the correspondence received by the members of this

house dealing with this situation, undoubtedly there is a strong realization among the veterans in this country that the present level of pensions and allowances is not sufficient to meet the increased costs they must meet from day to day. Rents have increased as a consequence of increased building costs, about which I think the government has heard a great deal. Food and clothing costs have increased. Because of the fixed level of incomes of veterans, and increasing costs, the veterans are now finding themselves in what our agriculturist friends refer to as a cost-price squeeze. Surely the government has had ample opportunity to do something to alleviate this situation, or at least to give the veterans some assurance that action is contemplated.
I should now like to refer to the recommendations contained in the report of the standing committee on veterans affairs, as presented to the house on December 10, 1963. Recommendation No. 9 in that third report to this house is as follows:
Your committee feels that the time has come when major pieces of pensions legislation should be reviewed and is of the opinion that much of the difficulty can be overcome by reviewing the sections in question so as to clarify the following points:
(a) "Benefit of doubt". At the moment there is some evidence to show that the interpretation now being given by the commissioners is not sufficiently broad to be entirely in keeping with what we believe to be the spirit of the act.
We suggest that the word "doubt" in the phrase "benefit of doubt" be interpreted to mean "a reasonable doubt" as might be expected to arise in the mind of a reasonable man in the street.
As the minister is well aware, this question about the benefit of doubt was raised during the deliberations of the committee. The chairman of the pension commission said that the benefit of doubt in his opinion is adequately exercised in reviewing every case that comes before the commission. We do not doubt the sincerity of the chairman of the pension commission in that regard. We believe that within the general terms of reference to that commission they do exercise the benefit of the doubt. I am sure there is not one member of this house who does not have a thick file of representations from veterans in respect of applications for pension or revisions of pension. As a result I am sure most members have come to the conclusion that the benefit of the doubt clause has not been exercised as generously as has been suggested, or as generously as we in this house think it ought to be. We do not think it is being exercised as
Supply-Veterans Affairs generously as was intended by the parliament of Canada when it enacted the legislation which contains that clause.
I should like to refer to a specific case, and there have been a great many over the last six or seven years. An individual of the Royal Canadian Navy while on board a vessel in the port of New Orleans between 1943 and 1944 underwent an appendix operation. From that time he has had a history of continuous illness, both while in the service and after his discharge, including tuberculosis, which resulted in a period of confinement in a t.b. sanitorium. This was followed by bouts of blindness, deafness and continuous pain. The veteran required drugs over a period of many years, all of which he paid for. No help was provided in this regard through any pension award because no benefit of the doubt was given. Unfortunately the doctors were unable to come to a final diagnosis of the disease and because they could not diagnose the disease they would not give an opinion whether it was as a consequence of war service. But one fact that was known was that the recurring illness was continuous from the time the man had the initial operation while on service until the time he applied to the pension commission. Finally after 18 years the pension commission did grant a pension but made it retroactive for only 12 months.
Where is there adequate application of the benefit of the doubt in such a case? This is what the committee had in mind when it asked the government to consider reviewing the legislation in order to provide a far more generous interpretation of the phrase "benefit of doubt" and far greater attention to the needs of the veterans in order to eliminate cases of the kind I have just cited, where years and years can elapse and the veteran is perhaps finally given pension entitlement only as a consequence of the exercise of the benefit of the doubt. But how many years of suffering, financial uncertainty, job loss and agony of mind must a veteran go through before the benefit of the doubt is applied in the manner in which the parliament and government of Canada meant it should be applied, I believe, when this provision was placed in the legislation?
I go on to the second part of recommendation No. 9 in the committee report where in paragraph (b) they state:
That the burden of proof rests with the commission and not with the veteran applicant.
Then there is a reference to an extract from Lord Denning's report which appears in the
9288	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs evidence during the committee's hearings last year. I believe it is up to the minister to tell us very soon whether these recommendations have been fully considered and whether legislation is going to be presented to us based upon them. He should also tell us why it has been found necessary to bring forward the general discussion of veterans affairs on these estimates before the legislation has been made available to the house for study. Section 10 of the committee's report reads as follows:
Your committee further feels that instead of a "one-shot" appeal which is both final and binding, there should be two appeals as follows:
(a)	a preliminary appeal in which all the evidence is transcribed and then the ruling is given in the form of a written judgment in which all points of evidence both medical and legal on which the ruling is based is set forth in writing and signed.
In the committee we heard officers of the department say that when a final judgment is given by the commission the veteran is acquainted with all of the facts and knows the reasons for the commission's decision. Although I do not deny that this information is available, I am not certain that those who have made applications and receive word of rejection are completely aware of all of the reasons. If they are, if they know the procedures to follow, if it is common knowledge among these people what they must do next, then how is it that so many members of parliament spend so much of their time endeavouring to secure answers for them? There is not one member of the house who does not have case after case in which he finds himself acting as an intermediary between the veteran and the minister and his departmental officials.
If the means by which veterans are informed of their rights and of the reasons for the rejection of pension applications are adequate, surely there should be no necessity for the voluminous quantity of mail in this regard with which members of parliament have to deal. There must be something missing in the procedures. Surely it would be a very simple matter to improve the procedures so that veterans who make application to the commission will have a far better understanding of the precise reasons for rejection, what they have to do next and how to go about entering an appeal. The second part of recommendation No. 10 in last year's report reads as follows:
(b)	a second ruling as at present. Your committee recommends that this procedure would correct the disadvantage the veteran now suffers as


he would know what arguments must be rebutted instead of having to prepare his appeal blindly as at present.
It may be that the committee report goes a little too far. In my experience the chief pensions advocate and the pensions advocates across the country do a remarkable job in helping veterans to present their appeals. Once the pensions advocates become familiar with the case and get in touch with the veteran their work on behalf of the veteran is outstanding. They give very sympathetic attention to these matters and I do not believe they permit veterans to go blindly into appeals.
However, strangely enough, although we are assured that the procedures are well understood by all applicants we find that time and time again members of parliament must intervene in order to bring a veteran who does not seem to know his rights into contact with the officers of the department, including the veterans advocates, who can assist him. Therefore in this instance it is perhaps not so much a failure of administration or policy but a failure of communication. If this is all that is missing, then for goodness sake let us get something done about it because it does not need to wait for legislation. This is an administrative matter that can be taken care of.
Because of the substantial volume of mail that members continually receive, I am afraid it is not going to be enough to suggest to members that the present procedures are adequate. Furthermore, I am sure the minister knows from his own experience, as do his departmental officials, that the mail we receive is not frivolous. It does not involve somebody trying to get something for nothing. The Legion branches and other veterans organizations do very valuable work in this regard, and time and time again when cases are brought to the attention of members of the house or the Legion it turns out that the applicant has not understood his rights and has finally approached a Legion branch or another veterans organization or a member of the house in order to try to get proper attention to his legitimate rights. A failure of understanding has intervened and has been the cause of considerable hardship and suffering for some veterans when in fact procedures exist to relieve such conditions.
The eleventh recommendation of the committee was in these words:
Your committee is of the opinion that the time has come when the excellent prosthetic service developed by the D.V.A. should become a national service available for all Canadians.

It would be interesting to know how far the government has proceeded in looking into that question, and I believe other speakers may be dealing with it in more detail later today. The twelfth recommendation reads as follows:
Your committee is aware that a point has been reached where a decision must be made regarding treatment services in both areas of responsibility and administration. Your committee recommends that fullest consultation be carried out with veterans organizations before any changes are made.
During the past year and a half we have had a good deal of discussion of this question in the house. I believe we can accept the fact that the minister is now consulting in advance with the veterans organizations and he has given the committee the assurance that he will do so in the future, for which we give him full credit. However, as the minister must be aware, if there should be any deviation from this intention there are members of the house who will have something further to say on the question. In view of the testimony given in the committee and what we have heard in answer to questions in the house I believe we can assume that the interests of the veterans are paramount in any change that is contemplated, that their interests will be given first consideration and that the veterans organizations will be consulted prior to any change.
I hope the minister has taken fully into account the recommendation that was made with regard to the payment of increases in veterans pensions and allowances. The recommendation of the committee was to the effect that such changes should be favourably considered whenever similar adjustments are made to the salaries of civil servants and members of the armed services, and consideration should be given to legislation which would bring this about. This would have the result of eliminating increases in pensions and allowances by the sort of hit or miss method that is used at the present time when other considerations than the ones to which I have referred are taken into account. If the government comes to the conclusion that the salaries of civil servants or members of the armed services are not adequate, they act. The procedures in this respect have been greatly altered and a continuous review now takes place. A similar procedure should be adopted with regard to war veterans allowances and pensions. Perhaps the minister has given approval to this idea or something like it, but we do not know. Again, I can only say that it is unfortunate we do not know because
Supply-Veterans Affairs we expected we would know before these estimates came before us.
Finally, there is a very special recommendation in this report upon which I should like to comment. It reads as follows:
In view of the special problems that time and experience have revealed concerning the Hong Kong veterans this committee urges that a special study and survey be made of their problems and particular disabilities.
We understand that such a survey is taking place within the pension commission or within the department. How much longer is it going to take? It has been ten months since this report was made and approximately 20 years since the Hong Kong veterans were brought back to Canada and the Canadian people and the department became aware of the special problems confronting them. During the last year or two, perhaps for a longer period, I do not believe there has been very much new ascertained within the Department of Veterans Affairs about the particular problems of the Hong Kong veterans. The diseases to which they were subjected and the conditions under which they were imprisoned were so severe that a much higher proportion of these prisoners of war have died during the years since the war than in any other particular group of veterans. They are living with continuing afflictions resulting from the diseases and conditions of their environment, their diet, the treatment they received and the things to which they were subjected and from which they have been unable to recover physically, and in many cases mentally as well.
I would expect the minister to be particularly sympathetic because of his own experience. I shared the somewhat similar experience myself in a German camp. I am one of the lucky ones and I expect the minister would consider he is one of the lucky ones, too. The Hong Kong veterans are not lucky. I do not suppose it was ever really lucky to be a prisoner of war, anyway. However, the Hong Kong veterans did encounter particularly difficult circumstances. We know the survey is being made. What are the results? There have been interviews, discussions and questions on this subject in the public forum for years. I feel it is time now we knew what it is the government intends to do. Is this survey going to go the way of so many surveys, and disappear into the limbo of pigeonholes? Let us have some answers. There have been sufficient months now in which to secure and correlate all the information. Give us some indication of the
9290	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs government's intention with regard to the Hong Kong veterans. I am sure there is no member in this house who would not regard sympathetically any action by the government in this regard.
Generally speaking, Mr. Chairman, these are the questions that come to the minds of the members of this committee in dealing with these estimates. Of course it is quite possible that details may be raised on individual items as we go along. One of the things that occurs to us now is that sufficient time has elapsed for us to be made aware of the government's intentions with regard to vetei'ans legislation. We are no longer satisfied to sit here quietly and wait while the government continues to use up further months making up its mind. We want to know now. We want to know precisely what the intentions are and when they are going to be implemented.
So far as the members of the Department of Veterans Affairs are concerned, the senior officers and other officers there, I think it was stated very well in the committee, and it could be repeated here, that every one of us knows the men and women who direct the affairs of the department are dedicated to the interests of the veteran. They have the support of this house in their efforts, regardless of where a member sits. We appreciate what they do, and we will support them in the doing of it. We do want some policy announcement now from the government.


Mr. Herridge:: Mr. Chairman, like the hon. member for Okanagan-Revelstoke, I was somewhat disappointed that the minister did not take the opportunity in introducing his estimates to inform the house of the government's intentions with regard to amendments to legislation which have been sought by veterans organizations and members of the house for some time. I trust that this brief, shall I say, prologue on his part only indicates we shall hear much more when we come to the epilogue so far as these estimates are concerned. I do want to say this to the hon. member for Okanagan-Revelstoke: I trust he shows the same vigour in protecting the rights of veterans whose property is about to be flooded by the Columbia river development as he has shown this afternoon with regard to these estimates. I can say that in all sincerity because I have had correspondence with many of them. I trust he shows the same sense of urgency in protecting the property and civil rights of 

these veterans against the British Columbia power authority.
Having said that, I want to say that I appreciate the courtesies I have received from the minister. I say quite frankly I have appreciated his personal attention to any questions I have brought before him. I believe that applies as well to inquiries directed to the officials as well. I should like to pay tribute also to the senior officials in Ottawa of all branches of the Department of Veterans Affairs and to the field staff. I support the remarks made by the previous speaker in that respect. There is no question about the services rendered by the officials of this department who, I think it is safe to say, throughout the years have dealt directly with more human beings than any other department of government.
Now, before proceeding, I want to pay tribute to the work of the Royal Canadian Legion, the army and navy veterans association, the Canadian corps, the imperial veterans, the amputation association, the Hong Kong veterans association, and all of those other veteran organizations, who have studied veterans problems so closely. These organizations have made it possible for this department, with the experience of 20 years, to accomplish a great deal for veterans and their dependants. I should like to say that this department is a rather unusual one. ft is the department responsible for providing services to the veterans and their dependants. This has been a great experience so far as Canada is concerned. This department has pioneered legislation that has shown the way for the development of legislation in social welfare, and so on. The department has pioneered certain medical research, as well as the question of manufacturing artificial limbs and that sort of thing, which has been of advantage to Canadians other than veterans. It has pioneered in the treatment service as well. It has pioneered administrative services-administrative procedures and methods. Moreover the Veterans Land Act administration pioneered certain things in connection with farm credit. It is my opinion that the farm credit legislation which was placed on the statute books a few years ago was largely based on the experience of the Veterans Land Act administration.
I have always taken a personal interest in the work of this department and the problems it has to deal with. I am, I believe, well into my twentieth year as a member of the committee on veterans affairs, more recently known as the standing committee on veterans

affairs, and I am sure that when the time comes for me to create a breath of fresh air by disappearing from this chamber I shall be able to say with the poet Moore:
When Time who steals my years away Shall steal my pleasures, too,
Fond memories of these days will stay And half my joys renew.
I wish now to deal briefly with a few of the matters which have been considered by the veterans organizations, by the standing *committee on veterans affairs and by a good many members of this house. Time will not permit me to deal fully with all the questions which concern veterans and veterans organizations. However, I expect colleagues of mine in tnis group to discuss other matters which are of importance. I wish to deal first of all with a resolution which has passed at the last national convention of the Royal [DOT]Canadian Legion. I think this is a matter to which the minister should give some consideration. I will read it:
Whereas Canada achieved nationhood in large measure through the efforts and sacrifice of those who served in the forces in time of war; and
Whereas the Royal Canadian Legion is composed of many ethnic groups which comprise a large portion of Canada's population:
Be it resolved that we urge upon the government that the Royal Canadian Legion be represented on all national committees that may be set up for the purpose of considering Canada's status as a nation.
I support the principle of that motion and 1 support the thought behind it. However, I would suggest it might be advisable to ask all the veterans organizations to get together and nominate persons who could serve on these national committees. I think the veterans of this country should have representation on these important committees which deal with the national questions mentioned and I urge the minister to give this resolution his consideration since I believe it to be very constructive and appropriate.
I wish to turn briefly to the question of pension rates. When the veterans legislation was first under consideration it was established that pensions would be related to the earnings of the ordinary workers of this country. I think this has been the generally accepted principle throughout the years. In recent years there has been an increase in the cost of living across this nation. Salaried people and wage earners have received a measure of compensation by way of increases in salaries and wages. Naturally the veterans organizations have been urging the government to consider granting an increase in disability pension rates. I support such requests
Supply-Veterans Affairs and I support the recommendation of the standing committee on veterans affairs that these rates should be increased to meet the circumstances of the day. We are looking forward with a great deal of anticipation to the introduction of legislation to amend the Pension Act.
There is too this question of the benefit of the doubt, which has been brought before the committee on veterans affairs on a number of occasions. I think this is one of the most contentious and longstanding problems with which the committee has had to deal. We listened last year to the evidence given by the chairman of the Canadian pension commission and we have also listened to the evidence presented by the veterans organizations. The representations of these organizations convinced members of the committee that the benefit of the doubt was not being given in accordance with the expectations of members of parliament when the bill was passed. A recommendation to this effect was included in the committee's last report to the house; I will not deal at great length with this question because one of my hon. friends will be discussing it in greater detail.
Another matter which came before the committee was a request that there should be automatic pension increases for all 50 per cent pensioners on the basis of age. The resolution passed at the convention reads as follows:
Whereas veterans in receipt of 50 per cent pensions for conditions other than gunshot wounds are also experiencing diminished earning capacity:
Therefore be it resolved that all 50 per cent disability pensioners be entitled to the automatic age increase.
I support that resolution, as do other members of our party. I have felt throughout the years that there was a measure of injustice in the working of this section of the Pension Act. I am aware that in the first instance the section was included so as to provide a measure of compensation for those who were wounded in battle. But I think there are many veterans who suffered disabilities in similar circumstances, on the field of battle or otherwise, and I would therefore urge that consideration be given to this proposal also.
An hon. member who spoke earlier mentioned the survey now being undertaken by the department in connection with the needs and circumstances of the Hong Kong veterans. I join with all others in expressing the hope that this survey will soon be complete and that there will be a report followed by some action on the part of the government to meet the needs of these men. In this connection let me say again that one of my hon. friends will

Supply-Veterans Affairs be dealing with the question of these veterans at great length later on.
Another matter in which I am particularly interested is the resolution passed at the last dominion convention of the Royal Canadian Legion to the following effect:
Whereas it appears that the Canadian pension commission from time to time adopts matters of policy in deciding pension cases which are not anywhere stated in law or by regulation:
Therefore be it resolved that whenever any new policy is decided by the commission in dealing with any case, the same shall be made available to the Royal Canadian Legion.
And that all present existing policy which is not stated by regulation or law also be made similarly available.
I strongly support this resolution and I believe this information should be made available to veterans organizations. I recall some years ago requests being made year after year on behalf of veterans organizations that the table of disabilities be made public. This was denied by successive governments. Finally-and I consider this one of my major achievements since I have been a member of this house-I moved a motion for the production of papers asking that this table of disabilities be produced. There was a certain timidity and hesitation on the part of the government of the day, but finally the minister took the bull by the horns and said he was agreeable to the production of the table. It was produced, and it is available now to the veterans organizations of this country. It has been a most valuable document to them. Though there was a certain reluctance about producing it, it is admitted now-I think the minister and his officials will admit it-that it has been a useful document for veterans organizations and their advocates to have in presenting the claims of veterans before the pension commission. I suggest that this further recommendation is very worth while and its implementation would be a positive contribution toward the co-operation that has existed throughout the years between the department and the veterans organizations in Canada in the administration of veterans legislation.
I now come to the War Veterans Allowance Act. I want to make a plea for the consideration of an increase in the war veterans allowance, on the same grounds upon which an increase in disability pensions is being sought. It is obvious from the interest taken in this question by veterans organizations at national, provincial and branch levels that this is a matter of serious concern to the many veterans and their dependants

who do require a substantial increase in the war veterans allowance. I know from personal experience in meeting a good many veterans throughout the constituency that there is a definite need for such an increase. I have discussed with the veterans their difficulties; I know their problems and the domestic circumstances of a good many of the veterans I have the honour to represent, and I have no hesitation in saying, in association with other members in this house, that those veterans on war veterans allowance urgently need an increase in the allowance.
I suggest that at the same time there should be an increase in the permissive income. I think the minister indicated to the committee that this question is receiving some consideration. I am of the opinion that there should be the abolition of the means test in respect of those veterans over age 65. We have never been able to secure general approval for this proposal, but I believe that for those over 65 years of age there should be the abolition of the means test in connection with war veterans allowance.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I come to the question of veterans hospitals. The policy announced by the minister has caused some concern in veterans organizations across this country. First of all I want to congratulate the minister on the way he presented his case before the dominion convention of the Royal Canadian Legion. I fully expected to see a bit of fireworks there. I sat in the audience and listened to him, and I thought he presented his case in such a way that it indicated he knew the spirit and temper of veterans. I heard a good many delegates to that convention, while not agreeing with all the minister said, speak in quite complimentary tones of his very tactful and, shall I say, gracious approach to a prickly problem.


Mr. Fane:: Don't embarrass him.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: After the minister had
spoken, that convention passed the following resolution:
Whereas many veterans with chronic disabilities must have domiciliary care and frequently must have expert medical advice as is evidenced from a further statement made by the director-general of treatment services that "they all have some degree of medical reason for being in the hospital and many of them have a very great degree of medical reason":
Therefore be it resolved that no transfer of any D.V.A. hospital to civilian administration be made by D.V.A. at the present time without full consultation at the outset of negotiations and mutual agreement with both dominion and provincial commands of the Royal Canadian Legion; and

Be it further resolved that no such operational transfer be effected until adequate domiciliary care, with the necessary medical services actually in being; and that if and when any active treatment hospital facilities are shared with civilian authorities, D.V.A. must control the admission, the care and the discharge of all veterans, and provision must be made for their admittance, regardless of the pressure of civilian demands.
As I said before, Mr. Chairman, I think all reasonable people recognize that there are changing circumstances with respect to admissions to veterans hospitals across this country. I hope and trust that the minister will, in dealing with this problem, recognize the spirit and purpose of the resolution passed by the Royal Canadian Legion. Personally I am quite optimistic in that respect.
Now I come to the Veterans Land Act. A resolution was passed by the Royal Canadian Legion in this connection. I am just picking a few resolutions out of the many that were passed, because they are of particular interest. There was one with respect to the removal of the time limit for serving personnel, which reads as follows:
Whereas it has been determined that many veterans with wartime service now in the Canadian forces are eligible for benefits under the Veterans Land Act:
Therefore be it resolved that the Veterans Land Act be amended to ensure that benefits may be available to veterans now in service upon discharge, regardless of that date.
I think that is a very reasonable request on the part of the Royal Canadian Legion, and the members of this group support it. We look forward to an amendment to the Veterans Land Act to meet the situation that is covered by this resolution. I could go on at greater length to some other minor amendments with respect to the Veterans Land Act, Mr. Chairman, but I will leave those to a later date.
I now come to a question that has been concerning veterans organizations and a good many veterans generally across Canada. This is the question of the maintenance of the veterans preference in the civil service. We will soon be 20 years away from the last world war, veterans are aging, and there is a tendency on the part of some people to feel that the veterans preference should no longer apply, and so on. But, Mr. Chairman, we strongly support the maintenance of the veterans preference in the civil service. The resolution passed by the Royal Canadian Legion dealing with this matter says:
Therefore be it resolved that the existing statutory preferences for war veterans as set out in the Civil Service Act be maintained.
Supply-Veterans Affairs
They were very concerned about the Heeney report of December, 1958, and the Glassco report of July, 1962, which recommended the substitution of a less embracing form of veterans preference for the existing absolute preference. The Royal Canadian Legion also recommended that additional preference be established for world war II veterans. The resolution reads as follows:
Whereas these veterans do not qualify for veterans preference over a non-veteran for employment in the federal civil service:
Therefore be it resolved that section 40 of the Civil Service Act be amended to provide an additional veterans preference after the overseas preference to the active veterans of world war II, regardless of where the veteran served.
I trust the minister will give consideration to that recommendation. Now, Mr. Chairman, I want to say a few words on behalf of the corps of commissionaires. A resolution was passed at the Royal Canadian Legion convention in this regard. I discussed this matter with a number of the delegates present at the convention who are concerned with the growing practice of government departments and private employers in employing private detective agencies. As a matter of fact I was rather shocked when I visited the national art gallery recently and noticed that the building is policed by a private detective agency; I think it is called the national security service, or something of that sort. This has caused veterans some concern, because it reduces the opportunities for veterans who are getting on in years to undertake useful employment and provide a useful service that is not beyond their physical capacity.
In this connection the Legion passed a resolution which is critical of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation because it replaced the corps of commissionaires in certain areas. It says amongst other things:
Whereas a great many veterans who were employed with the corps of commissionaires carrying out these duties have consequently lost their employment; and
Whereas the Legion is becoming increasingly concerned over the failure of governments at all levels to maintain the provisions of the veterans' preference and to promote the employment of ex-servicemen in government positions:
Therefore be it resolved that the government be requested to immediately halt any further replacement of corps of commissionaires personnel by private security agencies and urge other levels of government to follow suit.
I am sure all members of our standing committee on veterans affairs will support that recommendation by the Legion and I urge the minister to look into the question to see

Supply-Veterans Affairs what is happening at the present time. Because this practice of employing private detective agencies is growing.
I know my time is fairly short but I want to make reference now to a matter which concerns veterans in my own constituency. I have raised the matter in the standing committee on veterans affairs. I am referring to those veterans who will be affected by the building of dams under Columbia river treaty projects. There are two classes of veterans: There are those who are purchasing property, but have not completed their purchase from the Veterans Land Act administration, and those who have purchased it in other ways. I think this provides an opportunity for the department to set a pattern which will be of value to the other property owners who will be affected.
At this time I want to thank the minister for his prompt attention to a matter which 1 brought up by way of a question asked in the house. I am informed that the B.C. power and hydro authority soon got wind of the question and answer and immediately sent their men in to meet this veteran in question, to settle the matters of which he complained. These were not matters of price but matters of inconvenience and that sort of thing which I thought were thoroughly unnecessary. Anyway the matters were settled and I thank the minister for his prompt attention and the complete reply I received from him in this respect.
I think the department can perform a service to the veterans who come under its jurisdiction, namely those who still owe money on their properties under the Veterans Land Act administration, and also other veterans and property holders who are affected. I know that a good many of my colleagues in the house think I get a little too disturbed about this question, but I am representing people some of whom I have known for 50 years and the majority of whom I have known for many years. I urge the minister to make certain that everything is done to protect the rights of these veterans under the V.L.A. because, as we were informed in the committee by the director, who I am sure is most sympathetic, the Veterans Land Act administration could not agree to the sale of the property unless the veteran concerned gave his permission. If he failed to give permission, then as a last resort the administration had to get an order in council. I hope that the Department of Veterans Affairs stands right up squarely for the veterans who are depending on them.	-	:; n .

In this connection I want to read a letter written by a veteran who lives in the riding of Okanagan-Revelstoke. This letter was published in the Revelstoke Review on Thursday, October 15 last, and I have received numerous letters in similar vein to this from people living up and down the shores of the Columbia river and along the Arrow lakes, both veterans and other property owners. I mention this letter because this indicates the spirit of the B.C. power and hydro authority. The letter says:
Editor, Review:
Farmers in Sidmouth are now facing the darkest time in their lives. Soon we will be forced to leave our farms and homes at hydro's price.
There is no bargaining on their part; B.C. hydro sets the price and people have to take it or leave it. There is no negotiation. The letter continues:
We have nothing to say even if we have lived here 50 to 60 years, worked hard and made a place for ourselves where we could make a living as long as we live.
If that is just around the corner for us, 42,000 Canadians who died for freedom must be turning in their graves at this display of freedom and civil rights.
That figure is wrong; it should be 60,000 odd.
We might as well join the 42,000, as there is little to live for now.
We know we are living in an awful troubled world, but the Bible tells us that the time will soon be here when the lion will eat with the lamb- instead of now-when the lion eats the lamb.
That is the B.C. power and hydro authority to which he is referring.


The Chairman:: Order, please. I must interrupt the hon. member as his time has expired.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I have just two or three sentences more and I am finished.


Some hon. Members:: Carry on.


Lucien Lamoureux: Is that agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I appreciate the courtesy of hon. members. This letter concludes:
The present situation in our valley shows that water is getting more and more expensive and our farms less and less valuable.
I mention that because it is typical of the letters I have received from veterans; and I received another the other day from a veteran near Castlegar. It is obvious that people would not write in this vein unless they thought they were being treated unfairly and

unjustly and I urge the department to do what they can to help these veterans.
There is one more matter before I conclude. There is a veterans cemetery in the area, with individual veterans graves. I trust that the department will do all it can to see that the rights and wishes of relatives are respected. I hope they will make an investigation to see what cemeteries will be affected and what individual graves in other cemeteries will be affected; and I hope the department will do all it can to ease the difficulties of the veterans who are affected by this development.


Mr. Patterson:: First of all, Mr. Chairman, I want to say we appreciate the fact that the estimates of the Department of Veterans Affairs were referred to the committee for detailed study and analysis. I believe this gives an opportunity for a more thorough examination of the details of the estimates which are contained in the blue book. I was rather surprised at one or two references today to the absence of any extended remarks by the minister. It was my understanding that reference of estimates to a committee was not only to help expedite a thorough study of the estimates but also somehow to reduce the necessity of extended debate when they came back to the house; but perhaps my understanding is not quite true to the fact in this connection. However, I do not intend to prolong the debate on the estimates at this time, although I do want to make several brief references to a number of items of special concern which have been referred to me by constituents and others from time to time.
In the course of the committee hearings the Minister of Veterans Affairs indicated that amendments would be introduced to a variety of acts concerning veterans, and perhaps I was rather naive but I expected him to come through with them in due course. However, this afternoon it was pointed out that we have not anything at all in this regard except the minister's says so. We have nothing definite or positive, so therefore we are somewhat held in suspense. As I pointed out on another occasion, I think we have to take the minister's words at face value, and we expect in the very near future to have him bring before this house the amendments he has predicted and promised concerning various acts having to do with veterans affairs.
Mr. Chairman, reference has been made this afternoon to the possibility and desirability of an increase in war veterans allow-
Supply-Veterans Affairs ances, and I should like to give my full support to this request. It is not necessary to enlarge upon it or state once again the reasons for this request, but perhaps I should clarify the situation. There are two factors which ought to be taken into consideration. One is the constantly increasing cost of living, and the second is the upward revision of pensions that are being paid to Canadian citizens through other types of legislation. These two reasons alone would be sufficient to support an upward revision of war veterans allowances. Therefore when the minister does introduce amendments I trust one will deal with this matter.
Another matter in this same connection which has been brought to my attention on a number of occasions by veterans is the necessity for amendment relating to the service-related disability pensions. There is a strong feeling that these have been somewhat bypassed, and a number of veterans feel they had been completely left out in the cold. On their behalf I recommend that consideration be given to veterans who fall within this specific category.
Another request was made for an increase in the ceiling on permissive income. The hon. member for Kootenay West made reference to this particular matter. I do not think there can be any argument as far as this request is concerned, because we are all aware of the increased cost of living, and that with an increase in that cost there is a decrease in the purchasing value of our dollar. That is one of the reasons we have been advocating that, as far as personal income taxes are concerned, there should be an increase in the basic exemption. I believe that is absolutely necessary, and suggest the same principle applies to veterans. Veterans require more in order to maintain the standard of living which they have been used to. I was going to say the standard of living which they have enjoyed in the past, but perhaps I should not go that far. In drafting his legislation I would ask the minister to remember these veterans and bring in some definite recommendation or proposal in respect of an increase in the ceiling on permissive income of veterans.
There is just one other matter I should like to bring to the attention of this committee, although I was not very successful when I broached this subject during a meeting of the veterans affairs committee. I have reference to the quite general dissatisfaction in regard to decisions handed down by the pension commission. I was given to understand most of the personnel on the pension

Supply-Veterans Affairs commission are veterans and are bending over backwards to accommodate veterans, to the extent of bending the regulations almost to the breaking point. There is considerable room for improvement in this particular respect.
Reference was made to the benefit of doubt clause, and perhaps that is one of the most important issues to be considered, because like many other members of parliament 1 have received communications and briefs outlining the positions in which many veterans find themselves. In view of the method by which appeals from decisions of this commission are considered one could hardly expect the decisions to be altered. Looking at these decisions from the point of view expressed in the many representations we have received we can only feel that in many cases far better treatment could have been accorded to those individuals who have applied for pension or who have asked for revisions of their pension benefits. In this connection I suggest the minister should give close and diligent attention to this aspect of veterans problems. As was pointed out during the meetings of the veterans affairs committee, the greatest number of complaints and gripes lodged by veterans relates to this aspect of their problems. That being the case, it would seem to me that there must be some justification for this attitude of dissatisfaction toward decisions rendered by the pension commission.
As I pointed out earlier, Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to prolong the debate on these estimates, but I did feel that I should bring these points to which I have referred to the attention of the minister, and to give my support to the various suggestions which have been raised and which will no doubt be raised by hon. members during the course of this debate.


Gérard Laprise: At this stage in the study of the estimates of the Department of Veterans Affairs, I would like to make a short remark concerning the difference which exists between the veterans, or the active army, and the servicemen who serve in this country in peacetime.
I must point out that the minister and the government pay special attention to veterans, and I realize that this is necessary. In my opinion, there is surely room for improvements, and I realize that the minister, with his understanding and good will, is giving consideration to those future improvements.


But if some of our men who were on active service, whether on the battlefield or not, have recognized rights, we should also think about those who serve in this country in peacetime.
When a soldier serves overseas for a period of one, two or five years, or even only one year or six months, he has some rights. One realizes that those who serve in peacetime for periods of five, eight and even 11 years, do not get the same attention.
I therefore ask the minister to give more attention to our soldiers serving in Canada in peacetime, so that when for some reason or other they leave the army, they will not suffer hardships and have to rely on social welfare to provide for their needs. This is the recommendation I wished to make to the minister at this stage.


Mr. Rynard:: Mr. Chairman, first of all I should like to congratulate the minister upon his courtesy in always giving immediate attention to questions directed to him. I do not intend to prolong this debate for any length of time, but I do feel that I should express my hope that there will be no further encroachments on veterans hospitals across Canada. This is a day and age when we need more research centres. By and large, the veterans hospitals have proven to be great reservoirs for research.
It is almost 20 years now since the end of the last war, and it is obvious that most of the veterans of that war are over 40 years of age, although of course, there are some younger veterans of the Korean war. The illnesses and injuries these veterans suffered during combat, and for which they now require treatment, are becoming chronic and more disabling. It follows that the majority of cases will fall under the following headings: cardiovascular renal disease, chest cases, cancer, prosthetic cases or the effects of wounds and contusions suffered in battle.
Hospitals are established by the Department of Veterans Affairs for research purposes, the training of interns and as teaching centres in postgraduate work. All of the active treatment hospitals with which I am familiar are approved by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada and this puts the stamp on them to indicate that they are number one, so far as the training of personnel is concerned. In that regard I am not only referring to doctors. We are going to be very short of doctors quite soon. In fact, doctors are in short supply right now but the

need is going to increase over and over again. The same thing applies to personnel such as laboratory technicians, radiology technicians and so forth right down the line.
It is interesting to note that there are 270 doctors taking training in veterans hospitals across Canada and that there are over 157 interns in occupational therapy, physiotherapy, psychology and laboratory work. Another interesting fact is that there are some 90 research projects under way. If we are going to set up more medical schools across Canada, surely one of the things we must have is more trained personnel. We have to have more people who have done research work and have become professors because we are short now of such personnel.
A great many of the projects appeal to all of us because they are in the field of geriatrics, and there is not one of us in this house who is not getting older. In this field of course investigation is concerned with arteriosclerosis and why people develop it. This is in the news today because all one has to do is to visit the old people's homes and chronic invalid hospitals across Canada and he will see people being cared for there day after day at great expense to the taxpayers. I am trying to focus attention on the fact that if through research we can prevent the development of this disease we will have done a lot to relieve the burden that the taxpayer has to bear today, to say nothing of the suffering of the people involved, which is of course the greatest of all considerations.
Geriatrics also is concerned with the field of coronary disease and strokes. I am sure that all of us have friends or even members of our own families who have had a coronary attack or a small stroke. We see the mental ability of people who suffer strokes one after the other slipping away, unless something is done to keep the condition under control.
As I have said, our chronic hospitals are loaded with victims of these diseases. Surely the veterans hospitals are doing a worthwhile work from a dollars and cents point of view. This point is not emphasized enough. If the work they do can prevent a person suffering from a chronic disease having to be placed in an old persons home or chronic hospital where somebody has to look after him and where he becomes a complete and total liability, then they are certainly doing a great job in reducing the cost, to say nothing about restoring the happiness of the individual.
Supply-Veterans Affairs
In cutting down the number of veterans hospitals are we leaving out of consideration the rights of the veterans, the promises made to them and our debt to them? After all, there would not be a Canada today if they had not gone overseas and fought for this country. I am going to be brief but I want to draw the attention of the minister to the question of the application of the benefit of the doubt provision. I recall the case of a man who was receiving $8 a month in war veterans allowance. He had been ill for years and was unable to work. His wife went out and worked and maintained the home. She had to have a car to operate her business and she brought somebody into the house to look after her husband when he needed care.
If my memory serves me correctly, this man was awarded a war veterans allowance of approximately $8 a month. In addition, his hospitalization was paid for as well as his doctor bills and his drugs. This man has been in and out of hospital four or five times over the years to my own knowledge. When he was well enough that he could go home he was sent home for his wife to look after him and she did so and got help when she needed it. She did a very good job. When he became acutely ill again from his cardiovascular renal disease he had to go back into the hospital and be given oxygen treatment. He was treated many times in this way but after four weeks or so in an acute illness hospital the hospital wanted to get rid of him, so he was sent home again. Not once was he put into an institution or home. His wife looked after him.
After this man had received the allowance of $8 a month for two or three years an investigator called and looked into their bank book and a lot of other things. I understand that the wife had not earned over $3,600 in any one year. However, the investigator went to the bank and looked into the matter. The last I heard about the case was that the lady was supposed to pay all the money back. This man is 70 years of age. Where in the name of common sense is there any milk of human kindness or decency in such an action? I bring this case to the attention of the committee as one with which I am familiar and about which I feel very sad, because what has been done is not right. This man is a veteran of the first world war and is now 70 years of age. Those are the facts as I understand them.
I recall the case of another man who is a veteran of the second great war. He was in

Supply-Veterans Affairs the tank corps and was blown up a few times. He was an A-one risk and was in the army for five years. I knew his doctor very well and I asked him about this fellow. His doctor said he was a real hardy buck, just like the whole family. After spending five years overseas this man returned and tried several things but was a failure. Finally he became a patient of a certain doctor. Under any stress or strain this man breaks down. In other words, he was psychologically damaged.
This case was brought before the pension commission. The doctors gave their evidence and said that the man was pensionable. But what pension did they give him? Twenty per cent. With the great upsurge in education today, how in the name of conscience do they expect veterans who fought in the last great war to compete in a world where more and more education is needed and where it is harder and harder to get a job and keep it? This man is unemployable but he was only awarded a 20 per cent pension. This is not right, Mr. Chairman. I appeal to the minister to look into these cases and see to it that a little more of the milk of human kindness is shown. I know there are regulations, but for heaven's sake do not have the regulations completely loaded in favour of one side.
Then, I wanted to dwell for a moment on the problems facing the sons of deceased veterans. I understand they receive $500 per year if they are going to university. If they are going into medicine, which is a six year course, they receive this allowance for only four years. I should like to know if such a student could apply for a student loan under the new legislation and thus secure the extra $500 or $1,000 which may be needed.
In conclusion, I should like to say that I know the minister must be sympathetic to the veterans problems because he has been through the mill himself. Do not let us sit down and make a soldier who went over and fought for us subject to the balancing of a group of statistics, weighing this on one hand and that on the other. Do not let us treat him in that way. We know that the cost of living has gone up. The last time there was an increase in the pension was in 1961 under the previous government. Surely to goodness, when everyone else gets a salary increase or a pension increase, the veteran is entitled to one too. The members of this house have had their salaries increased. Why do we have to leave the veterans to the last? Probably the minister has been thinking about the things along this line that he should 

do, and for heaven's sake let us do them. Let us put the veteran back where he should be. We always seem to be late in looking after the fellow who went over to fight for us.


Mr. Otto:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to take a few moments to say something about the transfer of military hospitals to civilian authority. I support the previous speaker and say, with great respect, that I feel the minister should look very carefully into the question of the transfer of hospitals. The first question is, what is civilian authority? There is a presumption that there is some overriding authority in every city which controls the administration of hospitals. We know that in Toronto this is not so. Each hospital has its own administrative body. It is a well known fact that a doctor on the staff of one hospital cannot practise in another hospital. It is well known that some hospitals do not release patients on Saturday or Sunday. It is suspected also that some doctors keep their patients in hospital a little longer than necessary because of the system of allocating beds. In fact, the question comes up, how are beds allocated in hospitals? Is it on the basis of seniority in practice or seniority on the staff? Everyone knows that there has been trouble in the larger centres in connection with hospital beds and the shortage of beds. For that reason I feel this department should look into the matter carefully before transferring any veterans hospitals to these-civilian authorities. The administrative control of hospitals should remain with the department.
Then you will also have to face the question of the doctors in the department being paid a salary. If you are going to have another group of doctors who are in business for themselves in these hospitals, you are going to have a conflict of interest. Who is going to be in control? The department should remain in control until there is some satisfactory conclusion of the problem of the shortage of hospital beds. We have discussed these questions in the committee and it is clear that the patients are becoming more and more of one type, either rheumatic or aged. This does not give enough challenge to the doctors. We agree with this. We agree with a lot of the problems that Dr. Crawford has put before us. We agree with him when he says he wants to maintain the highest standards in his treatment centres across Canada.
There is another avenue that perhaps the minister has not explored, and that is to allow veterans hospitals to be used by veterans

and their families. Then the administration of these hospitals could still be maintained by the department. You could have all types of cases in these hospitals and it would also relieve the shortage of beds in other hospitals. Another advantage would be that mentioned by the previous speaker, the opportunity for research and for the development of new ideas in hospitalization. No one in Canada as yet has investigated the concept of hospitals that is quite common now in Switzerland, where they were faced with a shortage of nursing staff, too. With a slightly larger capital outlay, they have constructed duplicate rooms so that the relatives of some patients can live in and do a lot of the nursing chores, thus leaving the nurses free to perform medical chores. This practice has resulted in many people being drawn to the nursing profession. After all, we all admit that a lot of the chores nurses must do are not really medical chores. This is something which I believe the department could investigate in connection with veterans hospitals.
I should like to add this one word of caution to the minister: Do not transfer administrative control of veterans hospitals to the civilian authority, as you call it, until you are absolutely sure that the veterans will get first class treatment, without knowing a doctor or having had a doctor for a certain length of time, without qualification as to the size of his purse or any of these things. A veteran must have the best of treatment immediately. With that note of caution, I just want to say that I have received the greatest co-operation from this department and the minister. He should be proud. There has never been a question left unanswered or a problem left unattended to by this department.


Mr. Martin (Timmins):: Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to repeat many of the things that have been said here this afternoon, other than to endorse the idea that it is about time some attention was given to the pensions of veterans, and in particular the recipients of war veterans allowance. As has been said, people who are on a fixed income such as this are completely dependant on this government and this House of Commons to look after their present and future welfare. Certainly the time is long overdue, in the face of the rising cost of living and other circumstances, when some attention should be given to this matter.
I should like also to compliment the minister on the manner in which he deals with
Supply-Veterans Affairs problems. Even when he says no, as he unfortunately has to do on different occasions, he does it in a very nice way. My purpose today is not to criticize this legislation in general but to draw attention to some of its inadequacies. I believe this legislation was passed by people of good will who believed at the time it would be adequate to look after the needs of our veterans. But as time went on we found that loopholes and inadequacies existed, and it is to these that I wish now to draw attention in the hope that action will be taken to correct the situation.
One of the matters which has come to my attention, and I am sure it has come to the attention of other members of this house, is the predicament in which veterans of the first world war who are now in their sixties find themselves. Maybe they have found gainful employment over the years and belonged to various medical plans, either those they have joined in the course of their employment or others which exist across the country. These men are now in their late sixties. When they give up whatever jobs they are engaged in they may lose their medical coverage and find it extremely difficult to get coverage under private plans. This is a situation which calls for attention, and I think the Department of Veterans Affairs should consider whether it would not be possible to make medical and hospital coverage available to these people through a scheme which would cover all veterans reaching an age at which they are denied coverage by the various private plans which exist in this country.
There Is another matter which is of considerable concern to me because I believe that in addition to its unfairness to those involved it is a contradiction of common sense. Consider a recipient of war veterans allowance who does have medical and hospital coverage himself. If he is a married veteran and if he wishes to get coverage for his spouse he finds that in order to do so he has to insure himself as well as his spouse. I feel this is unfair because the Department of Veterans Affairs is already providing medical coverage for the veteran himself. Yet he has to pay a premium for double coverage despite the fact that he, like many other veterans, may be in straitened financial circumstances. I do not think this makes sense. I think it is a situation which should be straightened out. I believe that having regard to the small extra cost which would be involved, coverage should be
9300	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs provided for the spouses of all recipients of war veterans allowance.
This leads me to another problem and it is a much more complicated one. It has to do with recipients of war veterans allowance who still have dependant children. I fully realize that this allowance was originally intended for elderly veterans. But as I have mentioned we find these loopholes occurring from time to time. In recent years we have found that younger veterans, some of them considerably below the age of 60, may through some chain of circumstances, illness or accident, become completely unable to provide for their own living, and the existing legislation has been stretched so as to include these cases under the war veterans allowance provisions. However, no provision can be made for their children and their dependants. I believe something should be done in this connection.
I should like to illustrate this contention by drawing attention to one case which really highlights the loophole which exists in the legislation. I believe the minister is familiar with this case; part of these 61 letters which have accumulated in this file over the last 15 months are letters to his department. I should like to show the committee just what can happen to a veteran and his family under the present legislation. This has to do with a veteran who is only 42 years of age. This man is completely crippled, unable even to walk around, let alone provide any sort of living for himself and his family. As a result of various representations we have been able to establish a partial war veterans allowance which now amounts to $99 a month. In addition I was able to establish through the Ontario department of welfare a partial dependant fathers allowance. But I should like to draw attention to the ordeal through which this particular family has gone in the last 15 months. Aside from the war veterans allowance which has, thank goodness, been stable throughout these months, this is exactly what the family has received; I have the correspondence here to show the amounts to which the provincial department ruled these people were eligible. In September, 1963, they were entitled to $145.20; in October, $145.45; in November, $96.70; in December $45.95; in January $47.20; in February, March and April, $30.25; in May, $9.25; in June, $39.05; in July and August, $54.70, and now, $78.70. It is a miracle to me not only how this family can keep body and soul together but how they can keep their sanity.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: Just to make sure I have this straight-the hon. member is not now speaking of the war veterans allowance?


Murdo William Martin: That is correct.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: The variations in these amounts are not variations in W.V.A.?


Murdo William Martin: No, the minister is correct. I mentioned earlier that the war veterans allowance of $99 a month has remained stable throughout this period. But I am illustrating the ordeal which veterans and their families are going through under the existing legislation as it applies across the country in cases where they have to turn to two or three different sources in order to try to eke out a minimum standard of living. This is an actual case.
Moreover, some time last June I was able to get the department to reassess this case and the department came to the conclusion that there was a back payment due of $124.20, which they said would be forwarded to the family by the end of June. Well, that cheque arrived less than two weeks ago. In other words, this family was kept dangling on the end of a string for five months waiting for a cheque to come. How can these people budget, how can they have any peace of mind in circumstances such as this? This is why I say that while the veterans legislation in the main is good there are a number of loopholes in the various acts, and these loopholes must be plugged up.
There is one other point I should like to raise in the course of my brief remarks today. It has to do with veterans-possibly only a small number of them-who during their service, particularly overseas, came in contact with certain contagious diseases. I think the contraction of these diseases should be regarded rather as an accident; the attitude taken now is to regard them almost in the same way as a self-inflicted wound. I think that especially where families are involved, where children and dependants are involved -certainly no blame can be laid on a spouse or on the children-something should be done, and the department should take a new look at the way in which these particular problems are handled.
As I said, Mr. Chairman, my criticism is not of the legislation in general but rather of the particular things that crop up from time to time. I am sure every other hon. member is familiar with them, because I do not think the mail on these problems is confined to my office.


Mr. MacLean (Queens):: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to take up much of the time of the committee because I realize these estimates have been carefully examined by the standing committee on veterans affairs. However,
I would like to make one plea to the minister, and I do not want him or anyone else to get the impression that if I limit my remarks to this one topic I do not agree with some of the views that have been expressed by other members of the committee with regard to the need for reviewing and increasing the scales of pensions and war veterans allowance.
I would like to make a special plea with regard to a special, small group of veterans.
I refer to the survivors of the expedition to Hong Kong in 1941. I think everyone would agree that these men are in a special category. After all, they spent almost four years in prisoner of war camp, where they suffered from malnutrition, and so on. The minister is familiar with the excellent submission of the Hong Kong veterans association made to the veterans affairs committee and I would commend that strongly to him for a further review.
I am aware of the fact that the pension commission is engaged in a survey to determine exactly what the data is with regard to the health, life expectancy, and so on, of this special group of veterans. However, Mr. Chairman, this is a fairly long process and I would urge the minister to give immediate consideration to means of doing something for these veterans to recompense them in some degree for the special suffering they endured. They were in a special category, and still are I believe, because during their time in prisoner of war camp they suffered from malnutrition to an extent not experienced by other veterans. As a result of this, and for other reasons, they contracted diseases which are not even well known in this part of the world, in addition to a great many diseases like beriberi and pellagra, which stem directly from malnutrition. They were undernourished, badly housed, and constantly ill. Nevertheless, during their imprisonment they worked most of the time at hard types of labour such as in the coal mines, shipyards, and so on. In my judgment, Mr. Chairman, this has inevitably left not only physical damage with these veterans, but perhaps more importantly, physchological damage.
I would recommend to the minister that in the case of Hong Kong veterans he should
Supply-Veterans Affairs consider giving them entitlement to free treatment for any illness for the rest of their lives. In many cases these men have an anxiety neurosis, if I use the correct technical term; they are worried about their life expectancy, their constant illness, and so on, which makes it difficult for them to retain a job or leaves them with a fear that they will not succeed in staying in their job for a reasonable period of time.
I believe consideration should also be given to the possibility, in the case of Hong Kong veterans who are receiving veterans disability pension, of providing that their entitlement to pension should not be less than 50 per cent. This would compensate for the general deterioration in their health and I believe it would have a tremendously useful psychological effect, because they would then know their widows would not be left without recourse to assistance if they died prematurely. I commend these matters to the minister's attention.


Mr. Bigg:: Mr. Chairman, first of all I would like to say a word or two of appreciation for the devoted and dedicated men throughout the department who have served the veterans between the wars and since. I do not think any government department is to be so highly commended for the way they have looked after the returned soldiers generally. However, times change, and those things that were done for the soldiers 20 years ago are now out of date. I want to touch on just two things. One is the need for a complete review of the situation with regard to veterans pensions. In my opinion section 70 of the act, which in general is a very generous act as we all know, has not been taken by the pension boards in the spirit in which it was passed by this parliament. I might remind the committee that section 70 provides that the benefit of doubt should be given to the veteran in all cases.
I know, from having sat on the committee myself and from having received complaints from veterans generally, that this is their main objection; the veteran feels that before he can make a case for his pension he is obliged to prove, usually with documents, that he did in fact suffer such and such harm to his health, which is attributable to war service. Of course, Mr. Chairman, in a great many cases it is impossible to prove this. Although records were kept while we were in Canada and in England, and often on the battlefield, in a great many cases the records are far from complete, and in some cases the

Supply-Veterans Affairs most deserving veterans are left without any documents whatsoever with which to prove their case. Then they are obliged, generally, to go through a series of long correspondence with their old pals in order to find out who was their doctor, their old buddies in the line, and so on, and by verbal evidence of one form and another establish a case. Even then I am afraid that in some cases they are not given the benefit of the doubt. This is a difficult problem, but I am sure that we as legislators intended that when the veteran has a case which can be believed one way or the other, in simple terms he is to be given the benefit of the doubt. Efforts were made to put through a private bill, Bill No. C-7, but it has not been put through. It purported anyway, to remove the onus from the veteran, and to put into the statute books a clear ruling so the veteran would in all cases be given the benefit of the doubt.
The general cost of living is constantly going up-I know I am being repetitive, but I do not think it can be repeated too often until definite action is taken in this regard-and the circumstances in which we all earn our living in this modern age have changed. At one time, I suppose, say 30 years ago, if a man had today's veterans pension he would have been well off. However, today he is expected to live on it, pay the average rent paid in Canada and support himself alone; and we must all admit that the average pension does not do that in any style at all. Add to that the fact that, although we do not always like to admit it in our affluent society, a large percentage of our women are working, and if a veteran is completely disabled it means that his wife would have to stay at home. Therefore she is cut off from supplementary earnings to assist the modern family. Let us be realistic and realize that a single pension today, or even a married pension, is not adequate to support a home in the way intended.
The next point I want to make concerns the Hong Kong veterans. It is argued that the Hong Kong veterans should be treated exactly the same as anybody else. That is what people have said; but I personally have known some of these veterans over the past 20 years, and although I am not a doctor I would say without hesitation that the greater percentage of these boys have had their physical ability-and I stress physical ability because it is that on which all pensions are based -to earn their living in a pioneer country like Canada in most cases, I would say, reduced by at least 50 per cent. If there is nothing specifically wrong with them, such

as having had a broken arm or having lost their eyesight, something which can be definitely assessed, it is very difficult to say how much pension they should get. This group have asked in their brief for a 50 per cent pension for every veteran taken prisoner in Hong Kong. I would not go so far as to say that every man who served in Hong Kong has had his physical capacity to earn his living reduced, but this is certainly one case where section 70 should be applied.
Let us say a Hong Kong veteran complains of continuous fatigue. In this case his employer could be interviewed and if his employer said that he was one of the most willing men on the staff, but that he was just not capable of pushing a wheelbarrow, that he must be found a softer job because he could no longer earn his living with his hands, then we should apply the principle on which pensions are paid. If the Hong Kong veteran is incapable of earning his living with his hands, as a farm labourer or even pushing a wheelbarrow, then the principle we have always followed is that if he is 50 per cent reduced in this ability he receives a 50 per cent disability pension. Whether or not he has a leg off, if you reasonably believe that the reason he is only 50 per cent capable of earning his living with his hands is a result of serving for four years in a prisoner of war camp in Hong Kong, then that is a legitimate war disability and I for one say he is entitled to our deepest consideration.
Dr. Crawford has done signal service in providing medical services to veterans under
D.V.A. Largely of his own volition and in his own time he has made a detailed study of this whole question. I have discussed the matter thoroughly with Dr. Crawford and found him to be a very fine man in his attitude to these people. Not only has he made a study of this question but he himself suffered as a prisoner of war and knows the physical hardships which these men went through from his own personal experiences. He is a giant of a man, but neither he nor anybody else would expect the average soldier to be able to rehabilitate himself and fit into society after the war in spite of the terrible experiences these men went through.
I would say that Dr. Crawford has made perhaps the most outstanding contribution to our information on this subject, but I believe he could do more if he was given more funds and had more help. Either he or some younger doctor could do a great deal more and look into these rather strange symptoms exhibited by a man who has been nearly starved to death or perhaps temporarily

The Hong Kong veterans as a group have no funds available to make such a study or they would be pleased to do so, I am sure. They also have no advocate to pursue the matter for them.
If I as an individual were fighting a pension case I could appeal it and have an advocate assist me with my case. These advocates are usually very experienced in the law, particularly in this type of subject. But to my knowledge, the Hong Kong veterans have no way of getting the services of an advocate to take their case and to make sure that they as a group will get proper consideration. This is rather unique. For example, if I had lost a leg I would have had no difficulty in getting my case attended to. But this group is rather unique in the experiences and problems they have. I suggest they have an across the board problem inasmuch as their physical ability to earn their living with their hands has been reduced as a result of four years of near starvation.
I would suggest to the minister, and through him to his department, that he might take into consideration the appointment of a member of the legal profession or a member of the justice department to make representations on behalf of these men to medical societies, and so on, so as to find out what has been done in this type of case. This sort of evidence is available. The French have made quite an extensive study of the problem of tropical diseases connected with malnutrition and its side effects. The United States has not done as much as one might expect in view of the fact that they had hundreds of thousands of men who served in the Pacific. Nevertheless they have done something, and I suggest that this small minority group- perhaps only 1,200 men are involved-is certainly worthy of our greatest consideration. I should not like to think that the matter of spending a few thousand dollars to make a proper survey would stand in the way. This survey should be made quickly; it is no good bringing in a report 15 years from now. These boys have been out of the prison camps now for 20 years and old age and their physical disabilities are coming upon them. I should like to see immediate attention paid to this question, and if a proper study were carried out and a competent legal officer were to tie things up for them, a recommendation acceptable not only to the department but to the house as a whole could soon be brought down.


Mr. Groos:: Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief because I do not wish to delay the pas-20220-589
Supply-Veterans Affairs sage of these estimates, which have all been thoroughly investigated previously both by hon. members in the committee today as well as when they came before the veterans affairs committee. However, I should like to lend my support to some of the remarks which have been made by the hon. member for Timmins, particularly in respect to granting extra allowances with respect to children of recipients of war veterans allowance. The hon. member made a very good point there and I should like to support it. I also wish to support generally the idea which has been expressed in this house many times today, as well as in the veterans affairs committee, namely that there be a general increase in war veterans allowances. The reasons for this are too well known to require any elaboration here. The increase in the cost of living would justify this support to the hilt.
Lastly, Mr. Chairman, I should like to say that I also have a personal interest in the Hong Kong veterans group. You will recall that I introduced a private member's notice of motion in this house earlier in the year. I have been very gratified indeed with the sympathetic reaction this has aroused in the house and across the country. I intended to bring this point to the attention of the minister, and although the speaker immediately preceding me made reference to it, I should like to reiterate it for emphasis. I urge the minister, in respect of the investigation now taking place by the Canadian pension commission in relation to certain Hong Kong veterans, that it be completed at the earliest possible date, and that some time limit be fixed within which a report shall be presented.
Mr. Chairman, I shall close my remarks with those few words. Thank you.


Mr. Barnett:: Mr. Chairman, I am not a
member of the veterans affairs committee of the house, but I have given some attention to the proceedings of that committee in consideration of the estimates of the minister's department. I was interested to note that at the outset of those proceedings the minister informed my colleague, the hon. member for Kootenay West, that he was glad he would not have to discuss the Columbia river treaty. I notice today that he may be having some difficulty in avoiding that subject matter altogether.
In looking at the proceedings of that committee, and in listening to the discussion that has taken place this afternoon, it seems quite obvious that the main focus of interest of
9304	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs hon. members of this house at the present time is perhaps more in relation to changes in the legislation, which the minister indicated to the committee he intended to bring forward at an early date, than in relation to some of the questions of administration within his department. Certainly my main purpose in rising in my place today is to indicate my own feeling that that is the most urgent question which lies before us as members of the house.
Mr. Chairman, I have noticed a considerable change in the general attitude of the membership of this house in consideration of veterans affairs questions, even during the comparatively short time I have been a member of parliament. As other members have indicated today, I think there is a general recognition on the part of all of us that the members who initiated what is commonly referred to as the veterans charter did lay some sound foundations in the field of veterans legislation. What we are really seeking is not a basic change in much of that legislation, but rather the kind of improvement which will meet the situation existing today.
Other members have made reference to the fact, as did the minister, that generally speaking, because of the inevitable passage of time, the veterans of Canada as a group today are of an older age group than when the veterans charter was established, and for that reason I think it is perhaps fair to say that the emphasis of our interest is turning more toward questions of pension arrangements, whether disability or war allowances, than toward those matters which were of great concern to the members of this house shortly after the end of the second world war, involving immediate questions of rehabilitation, educational opportunities, the setting up of the Veterans Land Act, and things of that sort.
When the minister appeared before the veterans affairs committee he was optimistic, as ministers very often are, that the proposals he is going to bring forward will meet with the general approval of this house. I hope that will be the case. Other members have mentioned some of the things they hope this legislation will accomplish in the way of increases in war veterans allowances and other pension payments. Before the minister introduces this legislation I suggest that he consider what needs to be accomplished in the light of at least two facts. The first is the fact that the government, of which he is a member, is proposing to introduce a Canada pension plan


which, under the terms as presently proposed, will not really become fully operative for a period of ten years from the time of its passage. The second fact is one to which I have already referred, that the age group to which veterans belong generally is getting older. In other words a great many of the veterans in Canada will not really benefit as a result of a Canada pension plan. It seems to me that the steps taken in relation to war veterans allowances and veterans disability pension arrangements should be taken with that fact in mind.
Involved with that question is the other question, which has been referred to by a number of members this afternoon, relating to the benefit of doubt clause-that is to say, whether certain disabilities requiring pension arrangements are wholly or partially attributable directly to war service.
The second point I should like to bring to the minister's attention arises out of a proposal contained in the Canada pension plan, and to which consideration should be given. That is the idea of incorporating into pension arrangements for veterans one of the key principles of the proposed Canada pension plan. I refer to the arrangement whereby the pension plan is to be geared to the cost of living index or the general level of earnings index. During the first few years I was a member of this house, any member who proposed that a pension plan should be geared to that principle was labelled as an economic screwball. I remember that very vividly. Nevertheless as I have pointed out on more than one occasion, the government of Canada is actually taking some steps to incorporate that principle into the Canada pension plan. Certainly if any group in Canada should receive the benefits of the application of that principle to a pension plan, it is the veterans group of this country.
I believe revision should be made to war veterans allowances arrangements and to pensions for veterans, so that all veterans who may have requirements because of disabilities, but who, because of their age group, will not benefit from the introduction of the Canada pension plan, will be eligible for suitable pension arrangements. I hope that will result from the changes the minister has indicated he is going to propose.
The member for Simcoe East made reference to recognition of the need for the milk: of human kindness. As a result of my experience in dealing with individuals in the-minister's department who look after the ad-

ministration of veterans affairs, I am of the opinion that while there may be some minor incidents which would indicate a certain lack of the milk of human kindness, basically the the question relating to the milk of human kindness is one which the members of this house must consider in relation to legislation. It is fair to say that 99.9 per cent of the problems I have encountered in respect of individual veterans situations arise really, not from administration, but from the kind of legislation we in this house have said these people must administer, and the regulations that have flowed from that legislation.
I suggest it is very much the responsibility of the government and members of the house to take the necessary steps to remedy situations of the kind that have been mentioned by my colleague from Timmins and other members of the house this afternoon. I could also give similar examples if I wished to take the time. I certainly wish the minister well in his endeavours to bring about the early introduction of the proposed legislative changes and I hope they will live up to the anticipations many of us have with regard to improvements in the situation of the veterans.


Frank John William Fane: Mr. Chairman, I am pleased today to have the opportunity to say a few words on the estimates of the Department of Veterans Affairs. It is not my usual custom to congratulate the minister on his work because I feel it is not good to embarrass a minister in such a way. However, there are two points on which I will congratulate him. First, he has been appointed to a department which has always been staffed by dedicated men and women who give everything they possibly can to the cause of the veterans, and who do so willingly and without stint. He has also been appointed to a department with regard to which there is very seldom any real controversy or trouble in getting the estimates passed. Some of us at times may wish to say things that are aimed at being helpful to the department in the administration of veterans affairs, and this may take a little longer in discussing the minister's estimates than the minister might wish.
In making my remarks I know I am reiterating and repeating things that have been said by other members but I feel I should do so. I also want to point out to the committee that any changes in the acts found in the veterans charter are not the responsibility of the people who administer those acts but are the responsibility of the government of the moment and of parliament.
20220-589i
Supply-Veterans Affairs Therefore any changes that must be made are our responsibility. Any suggestions I may make will be made in that light.
I feel that the minister must take the advice contained in the recommendations of the standing committee on veterans affairs. Those recommendations are made by a committee composed of a goodly number of members of all parties in the house, and naturally they are made with the idea of helping those veterans who were not so fortunate as some of us who came back from the wars more or less in one piece.
In making my remarks I want to support particularly what the hon. member for Oka-nagan-Revelstoke, the hon. member for Sim-coe East and the other hon. members have said. I also want to remind the minister that all changes in veterans legislation should and must be discussed with the veterans organizations first before they are put into effect.
There are some special matters I should like to bring to the attention of the minister, the first being an increase in veterans pensions and war veterans allowances. In this day and age the recipients of war veterans allowances are not getting assistance adequate enough for them to live decently. The cost of living has increased and that situation affects veterans as well as all others. Most veterans have some other means of livelihood, but those who have nothing more than their pensions are entirely dependant on what they receive in this way, and their pensions should be increased whenever the cost of living rises or perhaps whenever civil servants are given a raise in pay. I know that would be fairly frequently, but what group of people is more deserving of having their means of livelihood increased than those veterans who were not so fortunate as most of us who were in the services?
Adequate veterans legislation is approved by practically everybody in Canada. There are between two and three million people who have a direct interest in veterans legislation and they are the greatest exponents of proper assistance. With regard to veterans pensions and war veterans allowance awards a great deal has been said about the benefit of the doubt. I realize quite well that the pension commission, the war veterans allowance board and the other boards concerned fulfil adequately on most occasions the spirit of the benefit of the doubt clause in veterans legislation. However, there are cases where it does seem that somebody has slipped up with regard to the benefit of the doubt clause, and it would appear to one on the outside that a
9306	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs little more consideration could have been given in some cases. Personally I have not brought too many cases to the attention of the Department of Veterans Affairs in which the benefit of the doubt clause has not been given full consideration. In fact, Mr. Chairman, the Department of Veterans Affairs is very good and, on the whole, I am satisfied with the treatment I have received on behalf of my veterans.
There is something, though, about veterans pensions which I feel should be given greater consideration. As I understand it, if a veteran receives less than a 50 per cent pension there is no continuing pension to the wife should the veteran die. I feel that more consideration should be given to the provision of assistance to the surviving partner in cases where veterans have been receiving less than a 50 per cent pension.
In so far as the war veterans allowance is concerned, I said that in many cases the amount authorized does not seem to be adequate to meet the needs of the veteran concerned. I believe it should be increased. I know there is a movement afoot in places suggesting that there be no means test in connection with war veterans allowance when an applicant is over 65 years of age. I make no recommendation in that respect, except that I would suggest to the minister he pay some attention to investigating the claims of people in this category.
The Veterans Land Act seems to be exceedingly well administered, and there is very little difficulty now with that. I am pleased to note that the Veterans Land Act is again operating as a unit and not as part of the Farm Credit Corporation.
I now come to my few remarks about veterans who were prisoners of war in the east, commonly referred to as the Hong Kong veterans. I know that the director of medical services is looking after these people. I know that he is torn by his loyalty to his fellow prisoners of war from Hong Kong, and I know that he has done everything possible to help them. However, there is a feeling amongst a great many of the Hong Kong prisoners of war that they are getting something less than they deserve. There is a feeling that they should be set aside as a special class, because of the extra privations that they were forced to undergo. I was fortunate. I was not a prisoner of war anywhere, so I do not really know exactly what the difficulties were. However, I do know these men went

through great hardship, and the majority of them feel that they were subjected to more severe treatment than prisoners in other theatres of war. I ask the minister therefore to do everything possible to see that these men get whatever consideration they deserve, over and above the consideration which the rest of the veterans receive. I have conferred with many of them and the complaints are the same throughout. They feel their treatment was much worse than that received by prisoners in other countries.
This item was discussed at length in the veterans affairs committee and a recommendation was made by that committee to the effect the veterans of Hong Kong should have their cases investigated.
The last time I spoke on the matter of veterans hospitals and the turning over of these hospitals to civilian control, I said that I thought until adequate facilities for domiciliary care could be provided there should be no question of turning over veterans hospitals to civilian organizations. I still feel this way. As I said, I believe the veterans receive more consideration in hospitals operated by the Department of Veterans Affairs than they would receive in hospitals operated by other organizations. I feel that until adequate care can be assured for the aging veterans who are not surgical cases, the hospitals must be retained within the control of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
May I call it six o'clock, Mr. Chairman?
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. Churchill:: I should like to ask the acting house leader about the order of business for tomorrow and Friday. Will it be the estimates as already outlined?


Mr. MacNaughl:: Tomorrow we will continue with the discussion of the main estimates of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Then, we will take up the balance of the estimates of the Department of Industry, namely defence production, atomic energy and national research council; then, citizenship and immigration, trade and commerce and public works, the last two or three not necessarily in that order because it would depend upon the availability of ministers when the estimates are to be called.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, October 22, 1964