1964-06-17

PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF MINISTER AND AMBASSADOR OF THAILAND

Mr, Speaker:: May I call the attention of hon. members to the fact that we have in the Speaker's gallery a distinguished visitor in the person of the associate minister of national development of Thailand, Hon. Mr. Buchana, who is accompanied by the ambassador of Thailand.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.



PRIVILEGE


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. Frequently when one wishes to raise a question of privilege he advises Your Honour in advance. Today I have not done so. Indeed, I have not indicated to anyone my intention to raise this point of privilege about which I feel very strongly.
Mr. Speaker, one of the principal attributes of the chair which Your Honour occupies is its impartiality, and in this respect this parliament is doubly honoured in the person who now occupies the chair.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Stanley Howard Knowles: You, sir, are human like the rest of us. You have made mistakes and you may make other mistakes, but your impartiality is beyond question. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I was shocked yesterday when I read in the home edition of the Toronto Telegram this heading over an article on the front page: "Mr. Speaker saves the Liberal party."


Mr. Cooper:: It was you saved them.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am not concerned about these interjections. The facts as to what happened on Monday will take care of themselves, but I am concerned and I hope all
hon. members of the house are concerned about our respect for the Chair.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If the implication in that heading were correct you, sir, should not be in the chair, but it is my submission that it is totally incorrect. As a matter of fact may I say, and this so often happens, that the heading is not borne out by the article itself, which was written by a staff person of the Toronto Telegram here in Ottawa. Let me indicate that fact by reading the first sentence:
Speaker Alan Macnaughton last night ruled against the government and the official opposition and, as they say in the west, lived to tell the tale.
In other words, Mr. Speaker, the writers for the Telegram here in Ottawa have no marks against them, but a headline writer in Toronto has committed an error which I feel this parliament, this House of Commons, cannot ignore. Let me state my view, which I think is widely shared. Your Honour did a great deal of work-and this was very obvious-before you rendered the decision you made on Monday; and in my view, far from what is implied in this headline being the case, you saved parliament from being put in an impossible position and you saved the nation from being confronted with an equivocal and unclear decision.
I hope, Mr. Speaker, that even as writers such as Mr. John Bird of the Toronto Star who said you did a good job for the nation on Monday, and such as Mr. James McCook who in the Ottawa Journal said it was Mr. Speaker's day on the hill, the Toronto Telegram will join with all of us in paying tribute to the courage and impartiality of the person who now occupies the Chair of the House of Commons.



DEFENCE

[Stage Direction]
Third report of special committee on defence-Mr. Hahn.

Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I wish to inform the house
4390	HOUSE OF
International Monetary Fund that initial payments for the basic grades of western wheat, oats and barley delivered during the 1964-65 crop year will be at the same level as the present crop year.
The initial payments effective August 1, 1964 are: for wheat: $1.50 per bushel, basis No. 1 northern in store Fort William/Port Arthur or Vancouver; for oats: 60 cents per bushel, basis No. 2 Canada western in store Fort William/Port Arthur; for barley: 96 cents per bushel, basis No. 3 Canada western six row, in store Fort William/Port Arthur.
For all other grades of wheat, oats and barley the initial payments for the 1964-65 crop year will be established at a later date by the Canadian wheat board.

On the orders of the day:


Clarence Owen Cooper: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce regarding the price of wheat. When is he going to announce the $2 wheat that was promised during the 1963 campaign?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I have made all the announcements for 1964-65 that have been authorized by this government to date.


Mr. E. Nasserden (Rosthern):: May I ask a
supplementary question of the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Has he forgotten so soon the pledges made during the last election campaign to increase-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. This question is out of order.



FINANCE


Hon. Walter L. Gordon (Minister of Finance):: I returned last night from a meeting in Paris of the ten countries participating in the general agreements to borrow of the international monetary fund and would like to report to the house on what transpired.
Hon. members will recall that last year on the occasion of the annual meeting of the international monetary fund the ministers and governors of the group of ten announced their intention of studying the functioning of the international monetary system and of the probable future needs for liquidity, and instructed their officials to examine these questions and report to them. Progress has been made in this work, and the ministers


at their meetings on June 15 and 16 examined the studies and analysis which had been prepared. Following this discussion we gave further instructions to the officials for drafting a joint statement which will be made public during the summer at the same time as the international monetary fund issues its annual report, which I expect will also be discussing this matter of international liquidity.
It is still too early to predict what the conclusions of all this inquiry will be, but I would like to assure the house that Canada has given steady support to proposals which will strengthen the system of international payments and ensure the growth of liquidity that will be needed in the future. These objectives are clearly in the interests of Canada, with our considerable dependence on international trade and payments.


Hon. George C. Nowlan (Digby-Annapolis-Kings):: I am sure the house will have listened with interest to the minister's statement. I am sure, too, that we all agree with the policy he has outlined, which is a continuation of the government's policy to strengthen these organizations.
When one reads the papers from time to time and sees the way in which some countries are increasing their rates, and the possibility of further difficulties in the future, I think it is a very good thing indeed that we have such an organization as the international monetary fund.


Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapointe):: Mr. Speaker, we favour a little less the discussion of the group of ten who meet in Paris from time to time to consider the monetary system, because we know that their objective-besides, it was mentioned in a release-is to achieve an international monetary system for the most industrialized countries.
We believe that the day Canada will participate in a single and integrated international monetary system we wiU lose a part of our sovereignty and become the prey of foreign financial interests, even more than we are at the present time.
That is why we recommend to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gordon) that he use discretion in his discussions with the ministers' of finance of those ten countries, because we intend to see to it that Canada's sovereignty in the monetary field shall be preserved since it is the basis of any political sovereignty.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	What are the plans for the reorganization, development and expansion of Canada's national museum?
2.	Will the new museum be ready for 1967?
3.	When will legislation be introduced into the house designed to overcome the administrative difficulties under which the existing museum has laboured; and as presaged by the resolution introduced into the house on January 24, 1963?


Mr. Lamoniagne:: 1. (a) Natural history
The staff of this branch has shown orderly development in the past few years. Future planned expansion will take care of those subjects which fall naturally under the responsibility of the federal national museum. Future plans for the zoology division include the addition of scientific and supporting staff in invertebrate zoology and quaternary zoology. The national herbarium will be expanded to include specialists in lichens and algae. The mineralogy and palaeontology functions will be strengthened by the formation of a geology division and the addition of staff in palaeobotany and invertebrate palaeontology.
(b)	Human history
(i)	Archaeology: The archaeology division is being brought back to its previous strength, with one specialist in physical anthropology and one in sub-arctic archaeology; at the same time a staff increase is intended to provide three specialists, one in each of the following: Atlantic provinces, Quebec and British Columbia.
(ii)	Ethnology: A new chief has been appointed, Mr. A. D. DeBlois, M.A. It is intended to fill his former position with a new ethnologist; and to make a staff increase providing specialists to cover the fields of boreal forest ethnology and Canadian ethno-history; and three juniors, one in each of these fields; also a cataloguer and a preparator.
(iii)	History: A chief historian has been appointed, namely Mr. F. J. Thorpe, who is a bilingual scholar and who has done graduate study at the University of Ottawa, and in Paris with specialization in French Canadian history.
Questions
(c)	Science and technology
The appointment of a director of the intended museum of science is under consideration as a matter calling for early action. His duties would be to carry on the formation now of the collection of scientific and engineering material which will be needed for the display halls of the science museum when it is built, and which has to be made in advance, as opportunities to secure objects present themselves.
(d)	The national museum's program of research is being carried forward, with an ever growing series of publications adding to scientific knowledge and public awareness of the museum's role in that field.
(e)	Common services
Increases in the staff of the library, photography, education and museology divisions are required in order to handle the increased public services requested and in order to prepare exhibits of national importance for the new museum building in 1967.
2.	The Department of Public Works has undertaken to have the new museum ready to hand over to the museum staff by 1 January, 1967.
Planning of exhibits for the new museum is proceeding; but no guarantee can be given that the whole of the two acre-odd exhibition space can be properly filled with exhibits worthy of the national museum of Canada in so short a period as six months.
3.	The government is presently considering proposed legislation and hopes to be able to make an announcement about it later during the present session of parliament.


PROSECUTIONS FOR COMBINES OFFENCES
Mr. Winch: 1.	From January 1, 1959, have any persons or corporations been fined for infractions of sections 411 or 412 of the Criminal Code (which were repealed on the 10th of August 1960) or for infractions of part V of the Combines Investigation Act offences in relation to trade (enacted by chapter 45 of the statutes of 1960) and, if so (a) what are their names (b) what was the amount of the fine in each case (c) when was the fine imposed (d) what infraction occasioned the fine?
2.	Have any persons or corporations been fined more than once for such infractions since January 1, 1950, and, if so (a) what are the names of the persons or corporations so fined (b) what was the amount of the fine in each case (c) what additional infraction occasioned the fine (d) was the fine increased because of the previous conviction and, if so, in what amount?


Mr. Macdonald:: 1. Yes.

Questions


TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT BUILDING PROJECTS, COMPTON-FRONTENAC CONSTITUENCY
Mr. Lalulippe: 1.	Has the Department of Transport undertaken any building projects in the constituency of Compton-Frontenac for 1963-64, and, if so, who were the tenderers and what was the amount of each tender?
2.	To whom were the contracts let?
3.	How many contracts did the Department of Transport let without calling for tenders and what was the amount and the type of work involved in each case?

Answer: 1. No.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	None.


U.S. TRANSPORT COMPANIES IN CANADA
Mr. Lalulippe: 1.	How many United States air transport companies are licensed to operate in Canada and what is the name of each such company?
2.	What was the total annual turnover for such companies during 1962?
3.	What is the total number of Canadians employed by such United States companies?
4.	What was the total amount of taxes, customs duties and other fees paid by such companies in Canada during the past year?

Answer: The air transport board advises as follows:
1.	There are 195 American air transport companies licenced to operate in Canada. They are listed in the Directory of Canadian Commercial Air Services which can be obtained from the queen's printer, in Ottawa, and which can be consulted in any public library or at the library of parliament.
2 and 3. The air transport board does not know.
4.	Existing statistics do not give the total amount of excise tax and customs duties paid. The customs and excise division does not levy any fees.


AIR TRANSPORT COMPANIES OPERATING IN CANADA
Mr. Lalulippe: 1.	How many licensed air transport companies are operating in Canada and what is the name of each such company?
2.	What is the total annual turnover of these companies?
3.	How many persons are employed in Canadian civil aviation?
4.	What branch of the Department of Transport deals directly with the problems of Canadian civil aviation?


Answer: In so far as parts 1, 2 and 3 are concerned, the air transport board advises as follows:
1.	438 Canadian air transport operators are licensed to operate commercial air services within Canada. Each is listed in the Directory of Canadian Commercial Air Services obtainable from the queen's printer, Ottawa, and available for reference in all public libraries and in the parliamentary library.
2.	In 1962 the last year for which complete figures are available, the operating revenues were $292,674,904.
3.	It is estimated that 18,512 persons are employed by Canadian commercial air transport operators.
4.	The civil aviation branch is mainly responsible for dealing with the problems of civil aviation in Canada including the control and setting of safety standards. The telecommunications and electronics branch and the meteorological branch are, however, deeply involved in the solution of civil aviation problems related to the provision of telecommunication and weather services.


* TELEVISION FILM RESPECTING PRIME MINISTER
Mr. Fairweather: 1.	Which members of the privy council saw any part of the film prepared by Richard Ballentine of Intervideo productions about Right Hon. Lester B. Pearson?
2.	On how many occasions did the Prime Minister see parts of the film?
3.	Why did the C.B.C. not broadcast this film on its television network?
4.	Will members of parliament have an opportunity of seeing the film which cost the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation $35,000?


Mr. Stewart:: 1. The Right Hon. L. B. Pearson, Hon. Paul Martin, Hon. Walter L. Gordon, Hon. Mitchell Sharp, Hon. A. J. MacEachen and Hon. C. M. Drury.
2.	Two.
3.	It is the corporation's opinion that the film does not meet C.B.C. standards.
4.	The C.B.C. does not plan any private showings of this film.


REDUCTIONS IN ARMED SERVICES
Mr. Winkler: 1.	What reductions have been made since April 21, 1963, to date in (a) civilian (b) military personnel, in the Department of National Defence for each of the three services?
2.	How many officers, in each rank, in each of the services, were struck off strength in the same period?
3.	What is the total personnel reduction proposed for each of the three services during the next 12 months?

Answer: 1. From April 30, 1963 to April 30, 1964:
R.C.N. Army R.C.A.F.
(a)	724	848	671(b)	826	1105	17812.	Rear admiral, 2; Capt., 2; Cdr., 19; Lt. Cdr., 38; Lt., 36; S/Lt., 21; A/S/Lt., 8; Comm, officer, 2; Chaplain class 4, 1; Chaplain class 2, 3; Officer cadet, 172, Brigadier, 4; Colonel, 10; Lt. Col., 28; Major, 104; Capt., 158; Lt., 103; 2nd/Lt., 15; Officer cadet, 284; Air marshal, 1; Air vice-marshal, 6; Air commodore, 5; G/C, 13; W/C, 52; S/L, 98; F/L, 234; F/O, 374; P/O, 1; Officer cadet, 364.3.	It is not possible at this time, to anticipate the total number of personnel reductions during the next 12 months.


* ADMISSION TO U.S. OF CANADIAN-BORN CHINESE
Mr. Fairweather: Must a Canadian of Chinese descent enter the United States through the so-called oriental quota and, if so, (a) under what authority can Canadian citizens be subjected to grading in this way (b) what steps have been taken by Canada to insure that the United States of America will not differentiate between passports of Canadians born in Canada?


Mr. Haidasz:: The United States immigration and nationality act contains special quota provisions for persons whose ancestry lies in what the act calls the Asia-Pacific triangle. This includes persons of Chinese ancestry regardless of place of birth, citizenship, or passport.
The Prime Minister made a full statement on this subject in this house on October 18, 1963, at page 3738 of Hansard and a copy of his statement was sent to the U.S. state department. He said, in part:
I should like to make it very clear that as for Canadian law and policy, the present government, like its predecessor, is firmly opposed in principle and in practice to racial discrimination.
With respect to the United States law relating to immigrant visas, and this is the matter immediately under discussion, it has since 1924, with some exceptions, been based on a national origins system. There are quotas, however, based on country of birth for most countries of the world. A separate-and this is the exception-and very small quota, based on ancestry and not place of birth, was provided for persons whose ancestry lies in what that law calls the Asia-Pacific triangle. If persons born in Canada and Latin America fall within the rules relating to ancestry in the Asia-Pacific triangle, they come under this particular quota.
-While it may not be appropriate, Mr. Speaker, for the Canadian government to make official and formal representations to the United States government against the racial origins features of United States domestic immigration law, this does
Questions
not mean that the Canadian government favours the inclusion of racial origin provisions in the immigration laws of the United States or any other country. These provisions, however, are not directed against Canada. A prospective immigrant of Chinese ancestry would find himself up against the Asia-Pacific quota provisions regardless of what country he was bom in.
An additional reason, Mr. Speaker, for not making formal representations to the United States government is the fact that on July 23 of this year President Kennedy sent a message to congress proposing important changes in the quota system. He described the national origins system as 'an anachronism, for it discriminates among applicants for admission into the United States on the basis of accident of birth'. He specifically proposed the repeal of the Asia-Pacific ancestry formula-The president's proposals are now being considered in congress.


* WINTER HOUSE CONSTRUCTION BONUS
Mr. Rynard: 1.	During what period in the winter of 1963-1964 was the $500 incentive bonus payable for winter-built houses?
2.	During the same period in the winter of 1962-1963, how many housing starts were made in Canada?


Mr. Byrne:: 1. Payments under the winter house building incentive program were available for dwellings in structures of not more than four units on which most of the construction work was carried out between December 1, 1963, and March 31, 1964. The final inspection date was subsequently extended to April 15, 1964. Dwellings started prior to December 1, 1963, were eligible for the incentive payments provided that construction work had not proceeded beyond the first floor joist stage, or its equivalent, at that date.
2. Monthly data on dwelling starts are available only for urban centres of 5,000 population and over. These data indicate that during the period December 1, 1962 to March 31, 1963, there were 9,326 single detached dwelling starts and 1,456 semi-detached and duplex starts. The number of triplex dwelling starts and fourplex dwelling starts is not available since these figures are included in statistics relating to apartment buildings of all sizes.


MIGRATORY BIRDS PROTECTION
Mr. Flemming (Victoria -: Carleton):
1. Does the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources possess any information which leads it to believe that the possibility of securing an amendment to remove the protective features of the migratory bird regulations will be discussed at the federal-provincial wildlife conference scheduled for Charlottetown June 18-19, next?

Questions
2.	Does the department favour any relaxation of the protective features of the present regulations?
3.	Will the department send a representative to the conference to state their intention of continuing to protect the migratory birds, by regulation?
4.	Is the department aware of the news release from Ottawa dated May 30 which suggested the possibility of securing a federal licence to hunt migratory birds would be discussed at the conference?


Mr. Laing:: 1. The Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources has no information suggesting that at the forthcoming federal-provincial wildlife conference an attempt will be made to secure an amendment to the migratory bird regulations so as to remove their protective features.
2.	Since all pertinent information on current numbers of migratory game birds is not yet available, it is not possible to decide at present whether the regulations will be changed for the 1964 hunting season.
3.	The department sponsors the conference and will be represented by the minister and the chief of the Canadian wildlife service who will continue to discharge their responsibilities under the Migratory Birds Convention Act and regulations.
4.	Yes.


CONTRACT FOR AIRPORT IMPROVEMENTS, TRENTON, N.S.
Mr. MacEwan: 1.	What were the names of the tenderers and the amounts of the tenders for the strengthening of the aircraft parking apron and taxiway at the Trenton airport, Trenton, Nova Scotia?
2.	To whom will the contract be awarded?


Mr. Pickersgill:: 1. Three bids were received:	Warren (Maritimes) Ltd., New
Glasgow, Nova Scotia, $27,838; Tidewater Construction Co. Ltd., New Glasgow, Nova Scotia, $34,142; Aberdeen Paving Ltd., Bedford, Nova Scotia, $36,430.
2. The contract is being awarded to the lowest bidder-Warren (Maritimes) Ltd., New Glasgow, Nova Scotia.


ALLEGED SHORT MEASURE OF PRODUCTS SOLD IN WAXED CONTAINERS
Mr. Orlikow: 1. Has the attention of the Department of National Health and Welfare been drawn to an article which appeared in the March, 1964 issue of the Canadian Consumer in which it is stated that, in tests conducted by the association on milk and fruit drink products sold in waxed containers, 13 of 21 brands tested failed to give full measure and, if so, what action was taken by the department to insure that companies selling

products to the public in waxed containers, would deliver the amount indicated on the carton in the future?
2. Does the department check food products under its jurisdiction on a continuing and regular basis as is required by the regulations of the Food and Drugs Act?


Miss LaMarsh:: 1. The department is aware of the article in the March 1964 issue of the Canadian Consumer relating to the net contents of dairy products, fruit juices and drinks sold in waxed cartons. The food and drug directorate has checked the products named in the article. Where violations were encountered, warning letters were sent to the manufacturers. Rechecks on a number of products have indicated that they are now satisfactory in regard to the net content declaration. A further survey of such products is in progress.
2. The food and drug directorate of the Department of National Health and Welfare, to the fullest extent possible with present staff and facilities, checks food products for compliance with the Food and Drugs Act and regulations.


TREATMENT OF DEFENCE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL ON TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT
Mr. Starr: Will the government set out its reasons for adopting a policy in the Department of National Defence as its affects the army personnel and the civilian personnel of that department in that it provides for different treatment with respect to civilian personnel on termination of employment.
Answer: There are important and fundamental differences between the conditions of service of members of the forces and those applicable to civilian employees.
The civilian staff of the government as a whole is not being reduced whereas a substantial reduction in the strength of the armed forces is planned. It is thus possible in many instances to effect the transfer of a redundant civilian to another government department with no appreciable effect on his career.
Most civilian employees whose positions are redundant have obtained from their jobs training and experience that is useful to these employees whereas the training and experience of many members of the forces is of little direct value in the labour market.
Members of the forces, once enrolled or commissioned, are required to serve during pleasure or in accordance with the terms of their engagement and they may be required to serve at any place. If they wish to resign for any reason, they incur a financial penalty.

Civilian employees, on the other hand, are under no obligation to serve anywhere, and they may resign to take a higher paid position, or for any other reason, on giving two weeks notice.
The member of the forces who is compulsorily retired is thus inherently in a more difficult position than the civil servant whose position becomes redundant.
However, the Department of National Defence sought and obtained the assistance of the Department of Labour, the national employment service and the civil service commission to supplement the efforts of the department in placing redundant staff. The efforts of all these agencies have been reasonably successful in that well over half of the redundant employees have been placed in alternate jobs.
The majority of those laid off who were unable to find alternate employment were contributing to the unemployment insurance fund, and were, of course, entitled to unemployment insurance, a benefit which is not available to members of the armed forces who do not contribute to the unemployment insurance fund.
In addition, the treasury board agreed that civilian employees between age 50 and age 60 who were released because of abolition of their positions, and who so wish, may be considered as special cases under the public service superannuation act and paid an immediate annuity equal to the actuarial equiv-
Questions
alent of the annuity payable at age 60. The usual gratuity based on one week's pay for each year of service is, of course, also payable to civil servants whose services are terminated.
Treasury board also agreed that removal expenses up to $500 could be paid to civil servants with five years service in classifications above the first promotion level who transferred to other government employment at another location.
The Department of National Defence and other agencies of the government will continue their efforts to ease the readjustments involved for civilian employees whose employment is affected by the changes taking place in the Department of National Defence.


WINTER WORKS EXPENDITURES, ROBERVAL COUNTY, QUE.
Mr. Gauthier: What amounts were spent on winter works in each of the following municipalities in Roberval county during the year ended March 31, 1964: (a) St. Andre (parish) (b) St. Andre (village) (c) Chambord( parish) (d) Chambord (village) (e) Lac Bouchette (f) St. Francois de Sales (g) Roberval (town) (h) Roberval (parish) (i) Ste. Hedwidge (j) St. Felicien (town) (k) St. Felicien (parish) (1) St. Methode (m) Normandin (parish) (n) Normandin (village) (o) St. Thomas Didyme (p) St. Edmond des Plaines (q) Albanel (parish) (r) Albanel (village) (s) Girardville (t) Dolbeau (u) Mistassini (town) (v) Mistassini (parish) (w) St. Eugene (x) St. Stanislas (y) Notre Dame de Lorette?

Questions Mr. MacEachen:
Municipal Winter Works Program 1963-64
Estimated cost	Estimated	Estimated fed. govt.of projects	payroll cost	share ofMunicipality	during period	during period	payroll cost$	$	$St. Andre (parish)	3,500	3,300	1,980St. Andre (village)	60,500	60,000	36,000Chambord (village)	80,000	78,006	46,804Lac Bouchette	125,668	125,668	75,401St. Frangois de Sales	273,309	129,291	77,575Roberval (town)	578,227	420,511	252,307Ste. Hedwidge	62,000	60,000	36,000St. Felicien (town)	335,712	274,671	164,803St. Felicien (parish)	55,000	52,000	31,200St. Methode	50,000	48,500	29,100Normandin (parish)	59,700	52,650	31,590Normandin (village)	93,200	87,200	52,320St. Thomas-Didyme	28,000	28,000	16,800St. Edmond des Plaines	24,000	22,800	13,680Albanel (parish)	50,000	50,000	30,000Albanel (village)	4,000	4,000	2,400Girardville	110,600	102,300	61,380Dolbeau	102,630	102,630	61,578Mistassini (town)	524,331	398,394	239,036St. Eugene	93,000	90,000	54,000St. Stanislas	79,500	75,000	45,000Notre Dame de Lorette	50,000	50,000	30,000Total	2,842,877	2,314,921	1,388,954


MOVING OP FISHERIES DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL, PICTOTI, N.S.
Mr. MacEwan: What moving and trucking firms are listed for the electoral district of Pictou, Nova Scotia, for the moving of personnel of the Department of Fisheries?
Answer: None. The removal expense regulations places responsibility for removal on the employee who makes his own arrangements subject to provisions in these regulations. One requirement is that he obtain estimates for shipment of household effects from two or more carriers. The employee is recouped for his cost of removal.


* CONVERSATIONS RESPECTING FILM ON PRIME MINISTER
Mr. Fisher: Did the Secretary of State for External Affairs have any conversations of any kind with either Mr. Alphonse Ouimet, Marcel Ouimet or Ron Fraser of the C.B.C. between April 29 and May 26 re-
garding the Intervideo production. "Mr. Pearson" and if so, what was the purport of these conversations?


Stanley Haidasz: The answer to this question is no.


QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN
Mr. MacEwan: 1.	What was the total amount of contracts awarded by the aircraft branch of the Department of Defence Production from January 1, 1964, to May 31, 1964?
2.	To what companies were these contracts awarded and what was the amount of same to each company?
Return tabled.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I want to raise a point of privilege under questions. May I ask why I should have to wait another week for answers to questions Nos. 1,290 and 1,291.

Both questions are very simple and both ministers concerned are present. One reads:
Where is the office of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration?
The second one reads:
Where is the office of the Minister of National Health and Welfare?
Surely those questions could be answered without delay.


John B. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that the delay here is due to the problem of interpreting the precise meaning of the word "office". Does this refer to a place, or does it refer to a particular legal function performed by the minister? When this question has been dealt with, the answers will be forthcoming.

On the orders of the day:


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Justice. In view of the statement made a moment ago by the parliamentary secretary to the Secretary of State, to the effect that it is apparently impossible to define the words "in the office of a minister", can the Minister of Justice have an investigation made as to how it was possible on April 10 and May 22 to pass orders in council appointing certain people to employment in the offices of certain ministers? Will he check to see whether those orders in council were valid?


Hon. Guy Favreau (Minister of Justice):: will with pleasure, Mr. Speaker.


MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
John B. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, motions Nos. 127, 128, 129, 130, and 131 are acceptable. I ask that notice of motion No. 123 be allowed to stand.


Mr. Speaker:: Motion No. 123 stands.


MUNICIPAL RESOLUTIONS RESPECTING FLAGS AND ANTHEMS
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 127-Mr. Pigeon:
That an order of the house do issue for copies of all resolutions from Canadian municipal authorities received by the Prime Minister since the introduction of the proposed resolutions concerning the two flags and the two anthems appearing on the order paper as items 44 and 45?
Motion agreed to.
Inquiries of the Ministry

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 128-Mr. Orlikow:
That an order of the house do issue for a return showing the names and addresses of all directors of chartered banks in Canada as of June 11, 1964.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 129-Mr. Pascoe:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before ths house a copy of all letters, telegrams, and documents exchanged between the Prime Minister or any minister acting on his behalf and the premier or any minister of the government of Newfoundland regarding a flag.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 130-Mr. Fisher:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence exchanged between the Prime Minister's office and the C.B.C. regarding the film project, "Mr. Pearson", including the letter from Richard Ballentine which may have set out the right of the Prime Minister's office to limit or censor the film and the letter from Mr. Reeves Hagan to the Prime Minister's office which may have redefined the limits set out in the Ballentine letter.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 131-Mr. Cameron (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands):
That an order of the house do issue for a return showing payments of indemnity and allowances under Senate and House of Commons Act since October 1, 1963.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Clyde Nowlan: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the Minister of Finance has informed us that he just returned last night he may not be conversant with the figures released this morning by the dominion bureau of statistics with respect to our balance of payments position, and the rather surprising increase in our deficits in the quarter just past as compared with the same quarter last year. The minister may have information with respect to that, but I would appreciate it if he would

Inquiries of the Ministry comment on this matter at the earliest opportunity. As I understand it, there has been an increase of some $103 million in the deficit for this quarter as compared with that of one year ago.


Walter Lockhart Gordon: Mr. Speaker, the dominion bureau of statistics released this morning the official estimates of Canada's balance of international payments covering the first quarter of this year. The deficit on current account totalled $341 million compared with a deficit of $238 million for the same period a year earlier.
The deficit was made up of a surplus on merchandise trade of $44 million in the first quarter and a deficit of $385 million on nonmerchandise account. The trade surplus was $26 million smaller than that a year earlier when it will be recalled the temporary import surcharges were still in effect. There were also some imports of a non-recurring nature in the first quarter of this year which reduced the extent of the merchandise surplus. On the non-merchandise account our deficit on travel account was higher than a year earlier. Travel abroad in the first quarter was undoubtedly stimulated by the date of Easter, which fell in March.
The first quarter of each year is typically the weakest on our current account, and it was to be expected that a large deficit would be incurred. I suppose also this is one of the difficulties caused by increased prosperity. However, apart from a substantial repayment to the international monetary fund in the first quarter, our official holdings of gold and foreign exchange declined by only a relatively small amount in this period of seasonal weakness.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask a supplementary question. Can the Minister of Finance tell us if the greatest part of that deficit is due to the outflow of Canadian capital in dividends and interest paid to foreign companies?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: As I suggested a moment ago, Mr. Speaker, the greater part of the increase or a big factor in the increase was the increasing travel expenditures of Canadians, presumably due to the fact that they are better off.


George Clyde Nowlan: Perhaps they want to get away from this government.


Walter Lockhart Gordon: Certainly there is no question that a big item is the amount of interest and dividends paid abroad.


Mr. G. H. Aiken (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: A further supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, which I direct to the Minister of Public Works. In view of the fact that the balance of payments deficit on travel is so great, can we expect shortly a further announcement of assistance to the tourist industry on the great lakes, and particularly Georgian bay, in meeting the low water problem?


Hon. J. P. Deschatelets (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, may I point out to the hon. member that, as far as the tourist industry is concerned, I feel that he could put his question to another minister.
It is only incidentally that the Department of Public Works can help the tourist industry by making navigation on the waterways easier. If that is what the hon. member has in mind, I must tell him that my officials are preparing a plan in that connection and he is aware of the attention they are giving thereto.


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Can the Minister of Finance tell us what part of the international payments deficit is due to dividend and interest payments, and whether it has increased over the same quarter for the previous year?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: I do not have the exact figures here, Mr. Speaker, because I did get in rather late last night, but I will be glad to get that information and supply it to my hon. friend.


Mr. H. A. Olson (Medicine Hat):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Finance said there were a number of nonrecurring increases in imports. At the same time he said there was a surplus of $44 million on merchandise account. Can he tell us how much of that surplus of $44 million on merchandise account is also non-recurring, such as payments for wheat?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: Mr. Speaker, I am sure my colleague the Minister of Trade and Commerce would question the premise of my hon. friend. I think the minister is hopeful that shipments of wheat will continue at a very high level.


REPORTED TAKEOVER OF CANADIAN LOAN COMPANY BY U.S. INTERESTS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington South):: Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the Minister of Finance. Does the minister intend to investigate the takeover of another Canadian loan company, namely the Delta Acceptance Corporation Ltd., of London, Ontario, by the United States Avco Loan Company of New York?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: No, Mr. Speaker; there are no laws against that sort of thing.


Mr. Reid Scott (Danforth):: As a supplementary question, would the minister consider investigating whether this takeover would have been necessary if the assets and resources of the now defunct Canada development corporation had been available?


Walter Lockhart Gordon: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what the hon. member means by "the now defunct", so I am not able to answer the question.
The figures on our current account show that our balance of payments situation remains a problem toward which we shall continue to work for a solution. The increase in the deficit was affected by the special factors mentioned, and is not to be regarded as disturbing.


COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Michael Siarr (Onlario):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Prime Minister. Has the government received written authorization from Her Majesty the Queen for the usage of the royal union flag, generally known as the union jack, in the circumstances prescribed in the resolution on the order paper, order No. 44(B)?


Righi Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: No, Mr. Speaker. It would surely be inappropriate to make a request for any such authorization, if it were required, until parliament deals with the matter.


Mr. Heward Graffley (Brome-Missisquoi):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is it the government's intention to ask that the subject of a distinctive flag for the commonwealth be brought up at the forthcoming meeting of commonwealth prime ministers, or is there any talk now that the subject of such a distinctive flag will be brought up?
Inquiries of the Ministry


Lester Bowles Pearson: I think we had better wait until we see what the Canadian parliament does with the resolution before we broaden its scope.


INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Roberi C. Coales (Cumberland):: I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the deliberate use of the flag design favoured by the Prime Minister to harass and embarrass the Leader of the Opposition in western Canada-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. This question is completely out of order. Perhaps the hon. member would care to rephrase it.


AGRICULTURE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Theogene Ricard (Si. Hyacinihe-Bagol):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Forestry a question. Can he tell the house why the federal government is delaying approval of the 116 rural development projects submitted by the government of the province of Quebec?


Hon. Maurice Sauve (Minister of Forestry):: Mr. Speaker, since ARDA was introduced, the government of the province of Quebec has submitted 116 projects at a total cost of $8 million, which have been approved, the federal government's share being $4 million.
Fourteen projects, at a total cost of $7 million, implying a federal contribution of $3,800,000, are now under consideration. Mr. Speaker, I think that if I listed all those projects I would immediately answer the hon. members question. Two of those projects were submitted on April 23, 1964; two on May 22; one on May 25; one on May 26; three on May 29; one on June 2; one on June 8; two on June 11, and the last one, yesterday, June 16.
Therefore, the greater part of those projects was submitted less than a month ago.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a supplementary question. Why the delay in approving the 29 specific projects about which Mr. Courcy, minister of agriculture of the province of Quebec complained yesterday when he upbraided the Minister of Forestry for infringing on a field which did not concern him?

Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Speaker:: Order. In view of the shortness of the question period today I suggest that the minister might make a reply tomorrow on motions or at some other time in order to conserve the time for questions.


BEQUEST FOR ROYAL COMMISSION INQUIRY INTO SITUATION IN EAST
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolieile-L'Assomption-Montcalm):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Agriculture I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister.
Does the government intend to set up a royal commission on the precarious state of agriculture in eastern Canada, in view of the fact that hon. Mr. Courcy, minister of agriculture of the province of Quebec stated he was in favour of such a royal commission? [Text]


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Northwest Territories.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I think the Prime Minister was ready to answer.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I was just going to say I was going to look into the matter.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Marcel Lessard (Lake St. John):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs.
We have asked him many times if the mandate of the Canadian forces assigned to the United Nations would be renewed within three months. The minister replied that the government had not taken any decision on the matter. Therefore, how can he explain the fact that we learn today, from a statement made by the Minister of National Defence, that the mandate of the Canadian troops in Cyprus will be extended by three additional months and probably for an indefinite period?


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I do not think the Minister of National Defence made a statement in that sense. I have his statement before me and, for the moment, I cannot add anything, except to repeat what I told the hon. member for Villeneuve (Mr. Caouette) the

other day, namely, that when the security council will have taken a decision I will be in a position to make a statement on behalf of the government.


Mr. Lessard (Lake Si. John):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Could the Secretary of State for External Affairs exercise some pressure on his colleague the Minister of National Defence, in order that Canadian forces rotate every three instead of every six months, as now proposed? In my opinion, six months is too long a period and the rotation period should be reduced to three months.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, there is of course no reason to do what the hon. member is asking me.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. May I ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs if he can give the house the assurance that in the event the security council decides to extend the term during which the peace keeping forces in Cyprus will continue to operate, the Canadian government will be prepared to announce that Canada will continue its contribution to the peace keeping forces for that period?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, sir.


Mr. D. V. Pugh (Okanagan Boundary):: supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Can the Secretary of State for External Affairs tell us the content of the communique from the Minister of National Defence with regard to the duration of time in Cyprus?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, what I said to the hon. member for Lake St. John who asked me the question, was that there was nothing in the statement attributed to the Minister of National Defence in Cyprus-warranting the conclusion which the hon. member with the best of intentions I know-reached. The Minister of National Defence was dealing with the question of rotation of troops.


Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, my question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs is on a related subject. In view of the statement of the secretary general of the United Nations that the problem of arms reaching Cyprus is critical and may be a decisive factor in determining the ability of the United Nations efforts in Cyprus to succeed, can the minister tell the house what action, if any, has been taken or is contemplated by the government, either through the

United Nations or in conjunction with our NATO allies, to prevent the further spread of these arms to the Turkish and Greek Cypriots?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. friend for giving me an indication of his intention to ask this question. I am in full agreement with the United Nations secretary general's statement in his report to the security council yesterday when he said: "The problem of arms in Cyprus is critical. Indeed, it may be the decisive factor in determining the ability of the United Nation's effort in Cyprus to succeed."
As I mentioned the other day, the government has been in consultation with the United Nations, and with its NATO allies on this problem. Strong representations have been made to all the governments concerned, and in addition bilateral representations have been made to other countries which might supply arms, urging that all such shipments be prevented.


Francis Andrew Brewin: May I ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Can the Secretary of State for External Affairs assure the house that aircraft and other armaments provided by Canada under mutual aid to NATO are not being delivered to Turkey or Greece in such a manner as might increase the danger of war between these two NATO countries?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I can certainly give the house that assurance. No F-104 aircraft paid for by Canada under mutual aid for NATO are being delivered to Turkey or Greece this year, as the Minister of National Defence informed the house in his reply to a similar question on May 13 last.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask a question of the Secretary of State for External Affairs supplementary to the one with regard to the moral use of Canadian arms supplied to other nations. Can the minister say whether arms supplied by Canada to the Portuguese have been used to butcher women and children in Angola?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, the question of the export of arms and military equipment from Canada to Portugal has come up on a number of occasions during the past few months, and I believe the house is familiar with the government's policy.
Inquiries of the Ministry
On October 21, 1963 I stated that Canada has not made any contributions of military assistance to Portugal since November, 1960. So far as commercial sales of arms are concerned we have, from that date, refused to authorize the export of any arms or equipment which in our judgment could be used against the African population in the Portuguese overseas territories. Portugal is aware of our attitude in this regard. Our policy is in keeping with the United Nations security council resolution of July 31, 1963 to which we have adhered.
I should add that I am not aware that anybody has suggested that Canada's military assistance is being used by Portugal in Angola, except as indicated by the hon. gentleman himself.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Is the minister aware of the fact that I quoted a newspaper dispatch in asking my question on this matter?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am now aware of that fact.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
^ Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of State for External Affairs): While I am on my feet, Mr. Speaker, may I in response to a question asked by the hon. member for Digby-Annap-olis-Kings-say that I have a reply with regard to the conclusions of the United Nations conference on trade and development. In view of its length I suggest that I table it. In view of its importance, as the hon. gentleman suggested to me privately, we might agree that it become part of today's record.
George Clyde Nowlan: This would be agreeable to me, Mr. Speaker; I think it should become part of the record. I am glad to know the minister has rectified his omission of yesterday. I am glad that as a historian he has recognized the fact that Port Royal was the capital of this country in the days when Stadacona and Hochelaga were Indian villages, and that it was in the constituency of Digby-Annapolis-Kings.


Paul Joseph James Martin: If I did any offence to the "historicity" of the hon. gentleman's constituency, of course, I take the opportunity of correcting it at once, and recognize that a fitting member represents such an historic community.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Speaker:: Does the house agree that this reply be printed in Hansard?


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



CANADIAN FLAG


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Michael Starr: I wish to address a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the fact that the Prime Minister declared that the government would stand or fall on the original flag resolution, will he advise the house whether he takes the same position with regard to resolution (B) which deals with the union jack?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, the technical situation is that there is only one resolution which has been divided into two parts. The position of the government with regard to the original resolution has not been changed because of the fact that it has been divided.



REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT FOR ST. JEAN BAPTISTE DAY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
£Translation]
Mr. L. P. Antoine Belanger (Charlevoix):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister.
In view of the fact that the national holiday of French Canadians will be observed next week, that is Wednesday, June 24, is the Prime Minister in a position to tell us whether the house will sit on that day and whether the hon. members from Quebec will be able to participate in that celebration and unjoy a holiday, without neglecting their duties here?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I can think of no more appropriate way of celebrating this important day in our history than being in this House of Commons deciding on a Canadian national flag.



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerald A. Regan (Halifax):: I should like to direct a question to the President of
IMr. Martin (Essex East).]
the Queen's Privy Council. Will the President of the Privy Council indicate what progress is being made by the committee which is developing a system of collective bargaining for government employees, and when this committee will complete its work? Can he reassure the house that a system of arbitration of employee grievances will be included in any eventually established system of collective bargaining?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Important as this question is, would the hon. member put it on the order paper.



SOUTHERN ALBERTA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lawrence E. Kindt (Macleod):: Yesterday I directed a question to the Prime Minister, but apparently he did not have the information and there was silence. Part of the answer regard P.F.R.A. at Glenwood rests with the Minister of Agriculture, and he is not in the house. The other minister concerned is the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Lawrence Elliott Kindt: In his absence may I direct my question to his executive assistant. My question is as follows. Will he inform this house and the country on the government's program to meet the flood disaster situation in southern Alberta at Waterton lakes, Glenwood, Stand Off and Cardston?


Mr. John N. Turner (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, I assume the hon. member will permit me to answer as parliamentary secretary to the minister. The water levels, fortunately, are receding at Waterton lakes national park and the people are returning to their homes. We have not yet got a firm estimate of the damage, but the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources will be visiting the park personally at the end of this month.



ARTS, LETTERS AND SCIENCES SUGGESTED POSTPONEMENT OF HEARINGS BY ROYAL COMMISSION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gene Rheaume (Norlhwesl Terriiories):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister. Will he consider asking the "B. and

B." commission to postpone further hearings in order to deny racial fanatics a national platform from which to advance their dangerous and divisive ideas?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Justice.
Could he tell us what steps his department intends to take about the hunger strike which has been going on for three days at the St. Vincent de Paul penitentiary?


Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, I must say that two of the inmates in one place and four others in another place had gone on a hunger strike Monday. Two of them gave it up, one Monday morning and the other Monday afternoon, and the strike was over yesterday afternoon or evening in the case of the other four.
As for the steps that have been proposed, especially concerning the possibility for some to carry on their university courses, I am giving the most serious consideration to this matter and I shall soon be able to report on it.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Francis Andrew Brewin: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a question of the Minister of National Health and Welfare. I gave her very inadequate notice, but perhaps she can answer it. Has she had her attention called to the statement by a distinguished United States doctor that politicians and air line pilots would be well advised to submit to a new heart disease diagnostic process called cine coronary arteriography; and will the minister give consideration to having this equipment installed in the House of Commons so as to promote the physical longevity of cabinet ministers and perhaps other hon. members of the house?
Inquiries of the Ministry Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Minister of National Health and Welfare): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member did show me a newspaper clipping just before entering the house, and I pointed out to him that perhaps some hon. members felt there were enough films being taken of them already without worrying about one of their hearts. However, I should like to say that it is not the belief of this government that it will be necessary to resort to such techniques in order to prolong its own longevity.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Lucien Cardin (Associate Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, on Monday last the hon. member for Lapointe (Mr. Gregoire) asked whether, in some places in Canada, army officers required payment of an admission fee by spectators to attend the changing of the guard and, in a supplementary question, he asked if I could take some action so that army officers would abolish the amount of 75 cents which is required from every tourist who wants to see the changing of the guard at the Quebec Citadel.
I wish to inform the house that the amount of 75 cents to which my hon. friend referred is required from every person who wishes to visit the Quebec Citadel, with or without the changing of the guard.
The Citadel is an important historic site and armoury whose operation and management fall exclusively under the Royal 22nd Regiment and not the Department of National Defence.
Because of the great number of people who visit the Citadel, it is necessary for the 22nd regiment to hire guides recruited among war veterans and students. The admission price is used, among other things, to pay the guides' and watchmen's salaries and for the maintenance of the regiment's museum which is open to the public all year round.
Because of the way the Citadel itself is built, and because it also holds the Governor General's summer residence, the changing of the guard takes place inside the walls and people who are already in the Citadel at the time of that ceremony can of course see it without paying anything extra.
4406	HOUSE OF
Canadian Flag



LABOUR RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Can he report any progress to the house relating to the dockers' strike in the port of Montreal, and whether in his view a settlement is imminent?


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, my officer in Montreal advises me he has been notified by an officer of the I.L.A. that work will resume tomorrow morning.



PRIVILEGE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. I wonder if, in rising, I am in your way when you want to recognize other members behind me, since, a moment ago, you seemed to be looking behind me to try to recognize other members, while I rose many times myself and you failed to recognize me.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. There is surely no question of privilege here. The hon. member has himself asked two questions today, and it does seem to me that other hon. members are entitled to ask one question.



CANADIAN FLAG


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Tuesday, June 16, consideration of the motion of Mr. Pearson, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Diefen-baker.
That the government he authorized to take such steps as may be necessary to establish officially as the flag of Canada, a flag embodying the emblem proclaimed by His Majesty King George V on November 21, 1921-three maple leaves conjoined on one stem-in the colours red and white then designated for Canada, the red leaves occupying a field of white between vertical sections of blue on the edges of the flag.
Robert Carman Coates: Mr. Speaker, before concluding my remarks last evening I outlined to the house what news-


papers in every province of this country were saying in support of a national plebiscite in order to determine the views of the Canadian people with regard to a flag design. Today I would like to turn to another subject, the Canadian red ensign, and its evolution in becoming Canada's national flag.
We are aware, today, how this debate has evolved-how the original resolution proposing two flags has been split so that a debate might go forward on only one of the two flag proposals. We know from the debate of Monday that Your Honour's decision in this regard was based on British parliamentary tradition. We learned during the Prime Minister's speech that the main reason for his party's objection to the Canadian red ensign is the fact that it was originally a British design. To see the Prime Minister performing in this way presents a curious spectacle. To begin with, he holds an office which originated in Great Britain. He speaks in parliament, which is a British institution. He spoke for two hours in a language which was English. Yet, at the same time, he rejects all that is British in our flag. I would point out to him that Mr. Ilsley in 1945 stated that the ensign flew almost uninterruptedly in Canada from confederation until 1904. It has been honoured in Canada for more than 70 years. How long does it take for an immigrant to become a Canadian under the Liberal government?
The Canadian ensign is Canadian by adoption, by assimilation and by tradition. In addition to the union jack it contains the maple leaves and the fleur-de-lis. It is, of course, the presence of the union jack which bothers the Prime Minister and his friends. It is so British that it is still part of the flag of Hawaii, one of the states of the United States. Mr. Speaker, the union jack contains the crosses of Saint George, Saint Andrew and Saint Patrick based on an ensign confided to William of Normandy by Pope Alexander. No one has ever accused William of Normandy of being British. These three crosses symbolize the Christian background of our peoples. Now they are to go. What of the maple leaves? The Prime Minister based his case on a royal proclamation by George V. As far as I know, he was British. Has the right hon. gentleman ever read the words of "The Maple Leaf Forever"? It begins:
In days of yore from Britain's shore
Wolfe, the dauntless hero, came-
He did not come here as a tourist. As far as I know, he was British. Why is it all of a sudden necessary to eliminate from our flag any reference to our British tradition? I say

to you, sir, that to the best of my knowledge no Canadian in Canada is anxious to remove the fleur-de-lis from the red ensign; no Canadian in Canada is unwilling to consider a compromise; no Canadian in Canada, as far as I know, is unwilling to put this red ensign to the test of a national plebiscite. The only fair way in which Canadians will ever be able to know what the Canadian public really thinks about our flag or about a flag design is to secure from them their opinions on the matter.
The Prune Minister took great pleasure the other evening in placing on record certain letters he had received from Canadians who supported his flag proposal. I wish to take a few moments in order to put on the record some of the views of those who have written to me on this subject. I have a letter here from a gentleman in Halifax, Nova Scotia, who has something to say about the red maple leaves which appear in the flag design proposed by the government. He says:
I do not know that it is obligatory that the flag should be approved by the college of heralds, but the college is certainly the final authority in such matters. For the official specifications for the coat of arms for Canada granted in 1921, the three maple leaves in the section at the bottom of the shield are green on a white field and not red. This follows the design of the sprig depicted in the coat of arms of the province of Quebec, three green maple leaves on a yellow field. In the Ontario design the maple leaves are gold on a green field.
I was chairman of the committee of the general synod of the Anglican church which adopted a coat of arms in 1938. The arms consist of the cross of St. George with four green maple leaves in the centre of the shield. The original design suggested red maple leaves and the Garter King of Arms promptly told us that red maple leaves would mean a dying church and the only proper colour was green. Moreover that was the colour of the maple leaves in the Canadian coat of arms of 1921.
I certainly hope the red maple leaves on the design before us do not indicate a dying nation.
Also, I received a letter from a Canadian in Ottawa making clear in great detail how long the red ensign has been in use in Canada and referring specifically to a pamphlet put out in the early years of this century by John S. Ewart entitled "Sir John A. Macdonald and the Canadian Flag". This article tells us that for many years the red ensign has been in use in Canada and exhibited as our national flag.
With regard to a referendum, I have received many letters both from people living in my own constituency and from residents of other areas in Canada urging that the govern-20220-2791
Canadian Flag
ment should not endeavour to foist its personal preference on the Canadian people but, rather, that it should secure the opinion of the Canadian people on what the design should be. The Prime Minister took great delight in reading letters he had received in support in reading and in support of his point of view. I happen to have available to me a copy of a letter he received from a lady who is not a Canadian; she is a resident of Rochester, New York.
I wish to read what this lady had to say, just to point out that all the letters the Prime Minister has received do not support his particular pennant, are not in agreement with his handling of this matter, and indicate just how autocratic he and his party have been in the procedure they have followed in this instance. The letter reads as follows:
There is just one tragedy. I have no influence to stop this flag from being presented to the people and I have no influence to change the government's mind. Actually, in a free country, two different designs, the red ensign and other should be presented to the country and a vote taken. Then the people who are supposed to be free would really be exercising their rights as free people. There is just one thing I can do. That is, turn my face away from the new flag and blink violently once or twice and swallow a great big lump in my throat-I remember most vividly a very handsome young man, who was not a born Canadian, who in 1940 put his hand up lovingly on a red ensign and said, "I am going to fight for my adopted country. I shall protect this flag. I shaU be brave and some day I shall kneel before the Queen . His page in the Book of Remembrance is turned each July 1st-and several years ago the Queen visited the chamber where the book is on July 1st and I wept all that day and wondered if my darling air force officer knelt before her and if she knew it.
Mr. Speaker, that is the type of letter that shows the shame in the action that has been taken by this government in autocratically and dictatorially forcing a personal pennant, a flag that is meaningless, on the Canadian public in its efforts at this time.


Mr. B. S. Mackasey (Verdun):: Mr. Speaker, at this moment I am very conscious of the fact that I am but a backbencher, participating however in a rather historic debate, one in which many great orators have already expressed their opinion and the opinion of their colleagues. Speaking in this house is not an easy task. One is always aware of the fact that this is a house of debate, made up of an audience that is both critical and at times very cruel, but an audience that in the final analysis fulfils its mandate to the people of Canada.

Canadian Flag
There are times when I sit in the back bench, listening to great Canadians participating in debate, that I become very conscious of my heritage. X say to you, Mr. Speaker, that there are great Canadians in this house; such great Canadians as the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson), the right hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefenbaker), Mr. Douglas, Mr. Knowles, Mr. Flemming (Victoria-Carleton), Mr. Martin and so many other memorable people who have dedicated their lives to Canada through the medium of elected office. I suppose I am not alone, gentlemen, when I think back to the great men who by their words have sanctified this chamber; the almost legendary figures of Canadian history, speaking in a time when public speaking was a way of life-men like Brown, Cartier, Laurier, Macdonald, Lapointe, Bennett, D'Arcy McGee and Chubby Power. It is little wonder then, gentlemen, that in participating in this historic debate I am very conscious of my limitations.
But, Mr. Speaker, despite those limitations I cannot visualize one member of this house, regardless of his political beliefs, regardless of whether he is for the new flag or the red ensign or the union jack, whether he wants or does not want a referendum, participating in this debate unless he is motivated by sincerity and honesty both to himself and to the people whom he represents. Perhaps I think too highly of this place. Certainly it has its critics. Certainly there are moments, even in this debate, when in the eyes of the press and the people in the galleries we do not conduct ourselves in a manner befitting our high office. But, Mr. Speaker, it is to the everlasting credit of this house that with very few exceptions our conduct has stood the test of time. Our way of life has made it possible for parliament to render its decisions with dignity and sincerity and with an honesty that is unequalled in any other country in the world.
I should hope that when this debate is over, when the new flag is accepted or rejected, whether we have a referendum or whether we do not, all of us without exception can look back and say; that we have conducted ourselves with dignity, that we voted honestly for what we thought to be in the best interests of Canada and Canadians.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: For myself, Mr. Speaker, I represent 90,000 Canadians residing in Quebec's third largest city, the proud city of Verdun; and knowing this community as I do, my political instincts-which, inciden-

tally, have served me well in the past both in civic and federal life-have suggested that possibly I should refrain from participating in this debate. At first glance this would be the prudent thing to do; but the Irish, gentlemen, even those of us bom in Canada, are not known for their timidity or for their prudence.
My riding has strong ties with Great Britain and France. The residents of Verdun are almost equally divided amongst those who claim French as their mother tongue, and those who claim English. One might think at first glance that in voting now for the red ensign I would alienate my French speaking friends, or in voting for the new flag I might be rejecting the English. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, practically all the English speaking peoples in Verdun originate from the British Isles, and our community is proud of the fact that thousands of people from Newfoundland, long before that province became part of Canada, migrated to and still live in the city of Verdun. These are a proud people who brought with them a great love of the union jack, of history and of the British Isles. So it is only natural that I did some soul searching before coming to a decision both on the referendum and on the flag. I thought, Mr. Speaker, of the fact that Verdun in the first world war sent more volunteers overseas than any community of similar size in Canada. I remembered too our equally impressive record in the second war and the fact that Buzz Beurling, a great war hero, was brought up in the city of Verdun. I am vividly aware of the presence of two fine Legion branches in my community, endorsers of the red ensign, branches which remember Canada's history in a manner that should be the rule rather than the exception. Our older branch annually celebrates the battle of Ypres with a military parade second to none in Canada; a parade designed not to glorify war but to point out war's futility; a parade in which our hospitalized veterans are not forgotten. Our second Legion, branch 202, recognizes Dominion day in a manner almost extinct now in Canada-a return to the days when the simple things of life were important, to a field day complete with foot races, fireworks and family participation.
Despite these strong ties with Great Britain, Mr. Speaker, and remembering too our glorious war record and the contribution which the city of Verdun has made to Canada, I must when the time comes vote for the new distinctive Canadian flag so eloquently introduced into this house by a man who must

go down in history as one of Canada's greatest sons. It is a flag which I hope will emphasize, not the differences in our backgrounds, but rather will serve as a symbol acceptable without reservation to all Canadians, including those millions who originate not from the founding races but from other nations-great Canadians who have contributed much to make Canada such a wonderful country.
There have been in this debate many fine speeches, including that of the leader of the New Democratic party, which have emphasized the need for unity and tolerance in Canada. I am one of those fortunate people in this country who know of the benefits of tolerance and understanding, for in my community I have been exposed to the best of two cultures, of two languages, of two peoples different in many ways. They are two peoples impatient with each other sometimes but who, Mr. Speaker, in my province at any rate, have lived together, played together, prayed together, and at times have fought together, people who respect each other always in complete freedom and always as Canadians.
There are those in this country, Mr. Speaker, who regard the new flag as an appeasement to French speaking Canadians. There are some who think this way who are motivated by hate, and we can only feel sorry for them. There are other sincere people who are motivated by a lack of understanding of what I know to be warm, friendly, intelligent people, people who, Mr. Speaker, time after time in the annals of Canadian history, have proven their allegiance to Canada, their respect for the commonwealth and their loyalty to the monarchy as head of the commonwealth of nations. I am proud to be part of a French speaking community. I might add, Mr. Speaker, that these are people ready and willing to sacrifice their own historic symbols for what they think is in the best interests of a united country.
I would ask all hon. members who are listening to my humble remarks not to fall into the trap of hatred. I would ask them not to judge Quebec or French Canada by the acts of those who would separate our country; those who would build up a case for separatism founded upon their own failure and inability to adjust to the ever changing face of Canada and Quebec.
There are some fine people in this house who have made a strong and excellent case for a referendum; but whether we like it or not, gentlemen, such a referendum would in no time at all, in the days before its con-
Canadian Flag
summation, deteriorate into a carbon copy of another general election. Picture if you will not only politicians touring the country and voicing their opinions on the flag but countless other Canadians caught up in the swell of emotions; Canadians from all walks of life emphasizing our cultural differences and widening the still bridgeable differences of opinion in our nation. That is the type of situation, Mr. Speaker, which could lead to violence and even to anarchy.
Nor can I accept a referendum as a convenient method of shirking my responsibilities; and in this regard I speak only for myself. To be willing to face my responsibilities is one of the very few virtues I have brought to this house, Mr. Speaker. I feel deeply that there comes a time in the life of every politician when he must look the issue straight in the face; a time when he must accept the challenge or forever fade into oblivion. For I have long come to the conclusion that doing what is right is, in the final analysis, doing what is politically right.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, let me say that I visualize the day when the advantages of the many cultures of this nation will become apparent to all Canadians; when the languages of Canadians of different backgrounds from our own will not be something to fear but something to cherish. I visualize the day when Canadians from sea to sea will have learned to respect each other, yes even to love each other as we do in Quebec; a day when Canada will start back on the road to the great destiny predicted for it by Sir Wilfrid Laurier. This I may not see in my time, but perhaps it will come in my children's time -a day which I feel will be hastened by our new distinctive Canadian flag, a flag which will be this parliament's contribution to the future greatness of Canada.


Mr. O. W. Weichel (Waterloo North):: Mr. Speaker, before speaking on this resolution concerning a distinctive Canadian flag I should first like to mention that on January 23, 1961 I had the privilege of taking part in the formulation of a resolution which was brought forward by the former member for St. Boniface, which asked for a distinctive flag. At that time I mentioned that if a change was necessary we should adopt the flag suggested by His Majesty King George V in 1921. I think that if a referendum or plebiscite were held all people in Canada would have the opportunity of expressing their own personal opinion.

Canadian Flag
The Royal Canadian Legion, dominion command, passed the following resolution in 1958, at which time I stood behind it 100 per cent:
Be it resolved that this convention requests the federal government to place the selection of a Canadian national flag before the people in the form of a referendum or plebiscite, using
(a)	the flag recommended in the majority report of the parliamentary committee of July 1946;
(b)	the flag recommended in the minority report of the same committee.
From time to time, Mr. Speaker, we have had requests concerning a referendum or a plebiscite. The red ensign, which after all is a distinctive flag, to me at any rate, has been my choice since the first great war, at which time I had the honour of serving my country. During the second world war a son of mine did likewise and I now have two sons carrying on this fine tradition in the Scots Fusiliers.
Further on in my remarks I will dwell on the red ensign and explain why I think it should be retained as the national flag of Canada, which is my right as a citizen of this great country. According to this resolution, we as members of this house are asked to decide on a new distinctive flag and in so doing to express our views and those of our constituents. This is not a party political question at all. It is one which concerns the very soul of the nation. It is one upon which every Canadian is entitled to have a say now that the government has insisted that it is an urgent national question. If Canadians are not prepared to act in defence of the symbols of their heritage today, they are inviting destruction of that very heritage tomorrow.
I believe that to ask hon. members to make a decision on behalf of their constituents in this regard is one of the most unfair procedures to which members could be subjected, as we well realize that people are divided on this question. In some areas you may have 60 per cent of the people in favour of the retention of the red ensign, and vice-versa in other areas. In voting on this important question we are really only speaking for those whose opinion may coincide with ours.
It has been suggested that a free vote of members of parliament and senators be allowed. Even with such a vote there would be a natural tendency, human nature being what it is, for government supporters to vote for the government's own design, and it is far from certain that a parliamentary vote on an issue of this nature would accurately reflect the feelings of all the people of Can-


ada. If such a referendum or plebiscite were held the ballot could contain reproductions side by side in full colour of the Canadian red ensign and the flag design sponsored by the government and under each design could be a square in which the voter could record his preference by merely writing an X.
I do not know the exact rules when asking for a referendum or plebiscite, but in regard to choosing a new flag or continuing with the red ensign may I make the suggestion that we should debate this resolution so that every member may have an opportunity to express his views and that after the debate is completed an educational campaign, like the one suggested by the former prime minister, Mr. King, be carried on in order to supply information as to the full meaning and history of the flag to every citizen in Canada, for their study and consideration. When the next election is held a plebiscite could also be included so that people could then vote according to their convictions. In this way we would have the personal opinion of every Canadian.
In an editorial in The Legionary of May, 1964, the following article appeared:
In a free democratic country, where public opinion is neither regimented nor suppressed, instances occur when people are stirred to the innermost depths of heart and soul. Then it is that government by the people, for the people, is given true effect by a national vote on the issue at stake.
Mr. E. V. Heesaker, dominion president of the Canadian corps association, must have provided the Prime Minister with a lot of food for thought when in a telegram on Tuesday, May 19, 1964, he had this to say:
Surely the present government's memory is not so poor that it cannot recall April, 1942, when your political party then in power asked the Canadian people through a national plebiscite to relieve them of an election promise of 1940 not to draft men for overseas service. We would respectfully point out, Mr. Prime Minister, that if an election promise by your political party then was reversed by a national plebiscite, why cannot your election promise of 1963 re a new Canadian flag be similarly acted upon?
I would wholeheartedly support such a plebiscite and would abide by whatever decision was reached, as would all Canadians of good will and moderation. As I previously mentioned, how can 265 members of parliament deal fairly with such an important question when voting for over 19 million people? After all, I feel that such a plebiscite is just as important as the one on conscription during the second world war.

The question whether or not Canada should have a new distinctive flag has been a perennial one. It crops up sometimes from the most unexpected sources, which would appear to indicate a serious lack of information concerning the flag itself and the source from which the propaganda originally emanated. Does it stem from citizens loyal to Canada and the crown or from subversive forces who desire to dismember the British commonwealth and break every link that binds together all the units of our great commonwealth of free and equal nations? God forbid. I say this because in the past I spent some time in England and Scotland and I came home thanking God that there were people in Great Britain ever ready to help, wonderful people, people whom I consider among the finest in the world.
Such information should be given to all who raise the question in order that the general public will be able to weigh the various arguments with understanding of the various issues involved and arrive at an intelligent conclusion. Surely we all realize that the Canadian red ensign has gradually grown up with the dominion until today it is the symbol of Canada's place of importance, not only among the great dominions of the commonwealth but among the nations of the world, as a symbol of leadership and prestige. It is a well known fact that people from other countries of the world recognize our Canadian red ensign as Canada's national flag. But are we in Canada too complacent about knowing our own flag? Ask yourselves this question in all sincerity.
Our men and women of the army, air force and navy services have proudly served under it in foreign lands, just as their fathers did before them during the first great war. To them it represented all for which they stood, all for which they were ready and willing to lay down their lives if necessary, and for it many shed their blood.
Have those of you who are ready to discard this fine flag asked yourselves this question? What would the 110,000 men and women who laid down their lives during the first and second great wars say if they were able to come back to this life? What would be their reaction to such a move? I am sure their answer would be: Why do we need a new flag?
Some time ago I read in one of our daily papers that in choosing a new flag we should forget our past. Just imagine someone like myself forgetting my past. What would the answer be from the thousands of disabled
Canadian Flag
veterans, the blind, the amps and paraplegic cases like myself, who have to carry our scars to our graves? Can we forget the past? I ask hon. members that question. I am sure we have carried our scars without complaint but I ask you not to make our load a greater burden.
By common custom the Canadian red ensign has been recognized as a distinctive Canadian flag, and this position was tacitly acknowledged and confirmed by prime minister Mackenzie King, who was born in Kitchener in my riding of Waterloo North and whose former home was redecorated by the former government as a historic place for visitors. We have not forgotten the former prime minister of the Liberal party. No, we have redecorated his home because we wanted to preserve it for historical purposes. He said that only an act of parliament is now required to make it the national flag of Canada, but before the final step is taken there should be an educational campaign, as I mentioned before, to supply information as to the full meaning and history of the flag so that every citizen may be assured that it is the most eminently suitable flag for our use. I am convinced, Mr. Speaker, that if the present government had carried out the wishes of the prime minister of that time such a resolution would not be necessary now.
The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefen-baker) mentioned something which I have in my speech and should like to repeat. The distinguished commander of the first Canadian army in world war II, General Crerar, recorded an incident of great historical significance to all Canadians when recounting the official welcome to him in August, 1945, by our wartime prime minister Right Hon. William Lyon Mackenzie King. The general wrote in the March, 1963 issue of The Legionary:
As we moved away from the central entrance of the parlament buildings Mr. King turned sideways in the car and looked upwards to the peace tower where, at the top, the Canadian red ensign waved. He then said, "And that, General, is another problem which your Canadian army has solved for Canada-the matter of our national flag".
When our prime minister of that day made this remark to General Crerar he was, in effect, saying that history produces an acceptable national flag for a people. At a time like this can we overlook statements made by such distinguished Canadians as these men and others?
It is not generally known that in 1921 the Canadian government specifically requested

Canadian Flag
His Majesty King George V to order a new coat of arms for Canada. In response to this request, His Majesty commanded the Royal College of Heralds to design a suitable coat of arms. The coat of arms is in use today, and in accordance with custom, the design of the shield has been displayed on Canada's flag. The Canadian red ensign is the distinctive flag for Canada. It properly shows upon it the union jack, which is the flag of the empire and commonwealth of nations. This proclaims to all the world that Canada is one of the great nations in that group. In a like manner Australia, New Zealand and South Africa also display the union jack in the upper comer of their own national flags. Surely Canada is not ashamed to be in that company. I know that we who fought with their fine men are honoured to share with them anything that will honour our country and theirs.
The emblem of the shield dates back to very ancient times. The couchant lion-or heraldic leopard-came to us from France, and was the emblem on the flag of William of Normandy. Ever since 1066, it has been incorporated in the heraldry of the British kings. The red lion rampant on the golden field is even more ancient, as it was the emblem of the Scottish kings and came to them from ancient Ireland, where it had arrived from the east about 580 B.C. However, it was also the family emblem of Brutus and Trojan, who founded the city of London about 1100 B.C. The harp emblem is equally ancient and was taken into Ireland by the Tuatha de Danain, the Danoi of the ancient Greek writers. The fleur-de-lis of the fourth quarter of the shield is well known as the lily of France, and held a proud place in the arms of the British kings from the time of Henry II down to the time of George III, proclaiming the French ancestry of the sovereigns from the distaff side of the house. Just about the time this emblem was removed from the royal arms, it began to appear in the heraldry of Canada and has been with us ever since.
It should be remembered that it was this emblem, not the tricolour, which came with the French settlers into this country long before the tricolour was used in France. I mention the emblems on the shield because it is my honest belief that not too many Canadians are familiar with these representations on the red ensign. The Canadian red ensign, therefore, symbolizes the main streams of history, with their common Christian heritage, which combined to produce the Canadian nation. Even the colours of the flag, red,

white and blue, have a rich meaning. Yes, Mr. Speaker, the red symbolizes the blood of Christ shed for the remission of sins; the white represents the righteousness of the saints, and the blue, loyalty and dedication to service. What else would we want?
The establishment of the Canadian red ensign through history, tradition and custom, was formalized on September 5, 1945, when our Governor General signed an order in council P.C. 5888 which stated that:
The red ensign with the shield of the coat of arms of Canada in the fly (hereinafter referred to as "The Canadian red ensign") may he flown from buildings owned or occupied by the federal government within or without Canada... and that it shall be appropriate to fly the Canadian red ensign within or without Canada wherever place or occasion may make it desirable to fly a distinctive Canadian flag.
I hope, Mr. Speaker, that I have given a very complete explanation of the Canadian red ensign. I hope that the Prime Minister will still give very serious consideration to withdrawing this resolution and giving every Canadian the privilege of voting for the flag of his or her choice. I still feel that such an important decision should not be left up to the members of parliament because, after all, such a vote could cause grave doubts in the minds of a great many citizens as to whether or not it represented the will of the people. These doubts could linger on for years and would remain a serious obstacle to the attainment of national unity.
Here, Mr. Speaker, is probably one of the most important parts of my speech. I say that when the Canadian red ensign design is examined dispassionately, without prejudice or unreasoned emotion, it can be seen that every desire of our multiple religious, racial and cultural background is answered. I realize that this flag is the cause of a great deal of controversy. It is such an important question that controversy, of course, is quite natural. However, when some people criticize the Royal Canadian Legion unfairly and say that organization is trying to run the government or is playing politics then I, as a member of this great organization since its inception, must bitterly protest such charges and statements. The cartoon in the Ottawa Citizen was grossly insulting to any legionnaire and I would say also to the Prime Minister. It is beyond my comprehension why the manager of this respected daily newspaper would allow some thoughtless, brainless guy to carry out such a cartoon. I have the cartoon here with me.

Canadian Flag


Mr. Winkler:: May I ask the hon. member a question? Is he referring to Mr. Christopher Young?


Oscar William Weichel: I do not know who the fellow is, but whoever he is I am letting him know what I think of him. This is the picture. I would say it is a terrible insult to every legionnaire, as well as to our Prime Minister. May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, does this contribute to unity in Canada, a picture like this? I should say not.
The Royal Canadian Legion, with its thousands of members, surely has the same right as any Canadian citizen to express an opinion in our democratic way of life. Yes, in case some people forget, let me remind them that these men and women, along with their comrades who paid the supreme sacrifice, carried the banner when our fine country was in need of their services. Let us not forget that. I as a disabled member, along with all members, can truthfully say that this organization has never played politics-


Mr. Caoueile:: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order-


Oscar William Weichel: Mr. Speaker, I would like to go ahead with my speech.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. The hon. member for Villeneuve is rising on a point of order.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, last night two Conservative members, namely the hon. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Balcer) and the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Mont-calm (Mr. Pigeon), claimed that I was reading my speech whereas I was just consulting my notes.
I do not want to be mean but I notice that the hon. member who has the floor at present is reading his speech.
There is a provision in our standing orders which forbids the reading of a speech in the house and it is on that basis, not because the hon. member is a Conservative, that I insist that he speak without reading his text.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. A similar point of order was made yesterday evening and, if I remember well, I pointed out to the hon. member who raised it that no provision of our standing orders forbids the reading of a speech in the house.


Oscar William Weichel: Mr. Speaker, I do not think there is any argument there at all. The Prime Minister and many others here have done this too. If I were 20 years younger I would try to do it without reading.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.


Oscar William Weichel: I might mention again that I, as a disabled member, along with all members can truthfully say that this organization has never played politics and has given no one the impression that it was trying to tell the government what it should do. Their big job has always been to work for the benefit of all the veterans, especially the disabled. Such efforts have been highly recognized by all broadminded Canadians, and I am sure the Legion does not want a pat on the back for doing what it is doing here. Its members, along with other veterans organizations, have done much in keeping Canada's security and unity at a high level.
To those who criticize this great organization in respect of the flag issue, may I bring to their attention the numerous community and international activities engaged in by the Royal Canadian Legion. We can think of the Netherlands pilgrimages, Legion sports for young and old and the conference of British commonwealth ex-service leagues. This group is continually working for the peace of the world, while we are sitting here trying to do our little bit too. It has been working for an increase in pensions for the amputees, the blind and the paraplegics, as well as for thousands of others. It has engaged in service bureau work and runs its poppy campaign, which is perhaps one of the greatest and outstanding efforts of these men in assisting veterans in need. If the government had to take over this work it would cost millions of dollars each year.
Then there is its community service, which should be recognized by all people in certain communities. It has programs ranging from physical fitness for our young people to low rental housing for the old. The Legion and its numerous branches across Canada has been establishing training camps and the success of these ventures, with competent coaches such as Mr. Dyson, has been outstanding. Then we have the junior Olympics, leadership, training, bursaries and-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I hesitate to interrupt my hon. friend but I am sure he will recognize at this point that he is straying

Canadian Flag
considerably from the question at issue, and I suggest he may wish to return to the question which is now under consideration.


Oscar William Weichel: Of course, Mr. Speaker, but this all comes from the criticism which the Legion has been receiving regarding the flag. I mention these services only to show the tremendous work which the Royal Canadian Legion is doing and has done for the welfare of thousands of Canadians. Its work, along with that of the war amputees of Canada, army, navy and air force association, Canadian corps association, Royal Canadian Air Force association, the Canadian navy association and others, has been tremendous.
These people who waste their time in order to criticize some of Canada's finest men should hang their heads in shame and thank God that we have men who, in time of need, gave their all for freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, ever ready and willing to make outstanding contributions for the betterment and welfare of our great Canada.
In closing may I say that these men in a democratic way, which is their right, have chosen to support the slogan favouring the royal Canadian ensign, "This is Canada's flag, keep it flying". My conscience tells me to support this solgan because thrice without hesitation our young men have fought under this flag and given their lives, and the best of their lives, for the righteous cause against the narrow nationalism of others. I am supporting the Leader of the Opposition in his amendment regarding the plebiscite.


Mr. John R. Matheson (Leeds):: Mr. Speaker, I have been listening with keen interest to all the contributions this afternoon and I confess I was rather moved by the comments of my hon. friend, the member for Verdun (Mr. Mackasey).
As a young man he went to St. Patrick's school in Quebec and I went to the Protestant high school. We were mortal enemies in those days at football, hockey and such things, yet I am amazed in how many ways his views and mine tend now to parallel one another.
I recall that I was brought up next door to a boy two years younger than myself, a boy who was an orphan. His father had been killed serving as a field officer in the British Indian army, and our literary fare was Chums, Boys' Own Annual and the Waverley novels. I used to become irritated by this young fellow, almost to the point of desperation and whenever he was just at the point of getting a thrashing he would look up at me

and say, "John, are you British?" He and I knew exactly what he meant because to us, sir, being British meant being generous, being valorous and being kind.
I hope in my comments this afternoon I will be as worthy as those who have preceded me in being just that. We can touch on this subject of flag only in the spirit of chivalry.
I know that in the retirement of the Canadian red ensign some people in this country will exult, and I know that some will weep. For my own part I will be one of those who will be misty eyed, as though witnessing the retirement of a good ship of the line; but I think it would be helpful to review in a very cursory way something of the history of the flags of Canada and particularly the flag which is now characterized as the Canadian red ensign.
I have before me, sir, the Canadian Almanac of 1896 and in it an expert of those days, E. M. Chadwick, wrote an article entitled, "The Canadian Flag". He was a well known geneologist, a Queen's counsel who wrote considerably on armourial matters, and he recommended as the flag of Canada a blue ensign, which some hon. members might care to look at later, which contained in the fly a white roundel charged with three red maple leaves conjoined. On the opposite side of the page-this appears on page 232, there is the badge of the Royal Military College club, which had been in active operation for some years.
Again you have in the arm of the knight the perennial three maple leaves on one stem. This is not just a curious coincidence. I discovered, looking at some of the books on coinage we have in the library, that in the reigns of Victoria, Edward VII, George V, George VI and Elizabeth II coinage was issued in gold, silver and copper bearing the device of the sprig of three maple leaves. This pattern apparently evolved long before any formal attention was paid to it by the college of heralds or any of the authorities. New Brunswick, in 1862, had a five cent piece composed in this fashion. There is a token of 1866 which was used as money in Montreal showing a beaver, and in the beaver's mouth is a sprig of three maple leaves. In short the development of Canadian symbolism referred to by the Prime Minister has had a long history. Indeed, he could have spoken much more extensively with respect to the various patriotic societies in Upper Canada and in Lower Canada-Quebec, as we know it today. The St. Jean Baptiste Society had early adopted this symbolism as its own. So also

had the Leinster regiment, the Royal Canadians, and also the native sons. It is natural that since these emblems had become popular over a long period of time they should at last become incorporated in formal grants of arms.
There are some who complain that this business of a new flag is a concession to the French. But the French are part of us. They are part of Canada-part of our family. In my household we have a lot of little people. In a family, every member is loved whether they are big or small, or young or old, and the interest and the anxieties of each member are important. The distress of one, as I see it -and I am trying to speak in the British sense-is the distress of all. Arthur Miller puts it this way. He says: "There are no unimportant tears". I do not think it is a concession to do what is just and what is kind. It is only by caring for one another and being joined together and being firmly rooted in this rich Canadian soil that our maple leaf family can survive.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Maiheson:: The red ensign, which is referred to as the red duster, is the most common flag in the world. I referred a moment ago to the article appearing in the Canadian Almanac. It would interest hon. members to know that as recently as 1962 Her Majesty's stationery office in England published a broadsheet called "Flags of the Commonwealth". As hon. gentlemen know, in the hierarchy of British flags there is an established precedence. There is the sovereign's standard-her own banner which flies over her residence; in England it would be Buckingham palace or Windsor castle or wherever she might be. Then there is the union flag. Then there is the white ensign of the royal navy. Then there is the blue ensign. Then there is the red peter or red duster, which is for the merchant service. What actually happened was this: in early colonial days on February 2, 1892 by admiralty warrant authority was reluctantly given for a defacement-that is the technical term; I am not being rude-of the red ensign to be used on board vessels registered in the dominion, and there soon followed provision for other colonial representation. As hon. members know, Australia and New Zealand have national flags each of which was adopted in 1901, one year before the peace which brought an end to the South African war. At the present time the commonwealth countries which are authorized to fly the blue peter 20220-280i
Canadian Flag
charged with the badge of their territory as their national flag include Aden Colony, Antigua, Barbados Bahamas, Bermuda, British Guiana, British Honduras, British Solomon Islands, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Dominica, Falkland Islands, Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Fiji, Gambia, Gibraltar, Gilbert and Ellice Islands, Grenada, Hong Kong, Kenya, Mauritius, Montserrat, North Borneo, Northern Rhodesia, Nyasaland, St. Christopher-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Helena, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, Sarawak, Seychelles, Southern Rhodesia and Turks and Caicos Islands. This list is taken from the broadsheet to which I referred a few moments ago. Already, in 1964, it is somewhat out of date because changes are taking place fairly rapidly.
Today, the red ensign is, I say, the most common flag in the world. By the provisions of section 73 of the merchant shipping act of 1894, it is the sea flag for all ships and boats belonging to any British subject except Her Majesty. For her own ships, it would be blue; white, if belonging to the royal navy. As of 1961-and again I hesitate to be categoric, because the situation changes- some commonwealth merchant vessels including those of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Cyprus, Somaliland, Western Samoa and Tanganyika territory, and of the British North Borneo Company, may, by admiralty warrant, fly the red ensign with the badge of the dominion, state, protectorate or trust territory in the fly, while all other colonial merchant vessels wear the red ensign free from any badge or distinctive mark. So if you come within hailing distance of the red duster and your telescope isn't working too well you should shout out the question asked of Jonah: "Whence comest thou? What is thy country and of what people art thou?"
I might add that various yacht clubs have permission to fly the red ensign defaced by the badges of their clubs, and, of course, this ensign is the house flag of a number of old British companies such as our Hudson's Bay Company, the one which comes first to mind. In addition to these British variations of the red ensign, there are approximately 48 other ensigns, jacks, national and state flags in the world which have red fields. About 18 of these have a device which occupies the upper left corner of the flag, while 16 others have a badge or device in the fly of the flag.
So, in a real sense, the red ensign is a sea flag which, however hard we may try, could not possibly be appropriated by ourselves, either by the order in council of 1945 or by

Canadian Flag
act of parliament as being the distinctive property of Canada. Our military routine orders of 1944 and order in council of 1945, were taken under the pressure and impetus of war and I do not think they can ever be regarded by reflective people as having effected any change in the traditional status of this flag of the sea. It is said that on one occasion Edward, Prince of Wales was somewhere near Admiralty Arch when he looked over toward Canada House and saw the red ensign. He is reported to have remarked: "I see the flag, but where is the ship?"
If we had followed the advice of a number of experts in Britain and in Canada in the early colonial period we would have ended up with a blue ensign charged with a roundel in the fly containing three red maple leaves and we would have thereby followed the pattern of other colonies such as Australia and New Zealand which established their flags and tended to confirm them in their proper purpose. Let us not overlook that the red ensign flies today in Australia and New Zealand, as well as in many other former colonies, but used correctly as their merchant sea flag.
Turning to consideration of the proposed flag of Canada, the one submitted by the government, I believe our flag must represent our country, our whole country, and nothing but our country. I refer respectfully to an address which was given by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefenbaker) when he was the hon. member for Lake Centre, on November 13, 1945. Speaking on a flag resolution, he said:
In my opinion, any flag which is determined upon must embody two ideas: one, Canada as a nation with a distinctive flag; the other, Canada within the empire.
This view was, I think, tenable once, but it is no longer valid today when we note that 17 members of the commonwealth family by 1962 carried flags bearing no colonial insignia whatsoever. I believe that if this resolution is adopted and steps are taken to produce this flag, Canada will possess a banner of exquisite aesthetic quality already, in Shakespeare's words, "loaden with honour". It is a strange claim to make for a flag that has not yet been unfurled, but may I ask hon. members to listen to me as I give the house a number of instances that I have discovered which embody this precise flag emblem; that is, three maple leaves conjoined on one stem.
This emblem may be found in the arms of Ontario, granted by royal warrant on

May 26, 1868. That was the grant by Queen Victoria. Hon. members will recall that in the arms of Ontario there are three gold leaves on a green field. The St. George's cross is an honourable augmentation and refers only to the past. The arms of Quebec, by the same royal warrant, was differenced by having three green leaves on a stem on a gold field. This was the old trick of the heralds of simply reversing metal and tincture to difference members of the same family. This left out one metal, silver-white, the noblest metal-and it left one remaining colour of a leaf in its natural state-red. I think we can only suppose that at an early stage when these achievements were determined for the provinces of Quebec and Ontario it was in the mind of the heraldic advisers at that time that there must be held in reserve for the nation Canada the combination of red leaves on white field.
Then the Great Seal of Canada, by the same royal warrant of 1868 embodies the two sets of three maple leaves of the two key founding provinces. Then we discover the amended crest of Baron Lisgar after he had accepted the appointment of second governor general for Canada. His earlier crest, as I recall, had a lion with a sword in its paw; the sword was struck off this second crest and in its place the lion held a sprig of three maple leaves. Then there is the badge of the Royal Military College club, Kingston to which I have already alluded, and firmly established by 1895. Then there is the Canada general service medal issued in 1899 for service in 1866-1870 in the Fenian raids and the Red river expedition.
Then we have the armorial bearings that were assigned to Sir Wilfrid Laurier by the royal college of heralds after Sir Wilfrid had become prime minister. This was obviously a new coat of arms that was struck for a Canadian prime minister, and he was given the insignia of three maple leaves on one stem on both his shield and his crest. This was apparently following the device given to a governor general several years earlier.
Then there was the crest of the Royal Military College granted by George V on September 16, 1920, the same perennial sprig of maple leaves. We come, I think, at last to the significant and important moment in history when there was heraldically speaking the fixing of the new flag of Canada. I have searched Hansard, but I do not think Canadians have ever really realized how much

work was carried out in connection with this matter by the committee established by Sir Robert Borden. At the conclusion of world war I it appears that a great many service people of military rank and experience had come back to Canada feeling that their own military insignia was somewhat deficient and lacked character and stability. Therefore a committee was set up by Sir Robert Borden, composed of Major General Willoughby, G. Gwatkin, who probably was the most knowledgeable man in this area, Thomas Mulvey, under secretary of state, Sir Joseph Pope, under secretary of state for external affairs, and Arthur G. Doughty, dominion archivist. There was also a Colonel Hamilton who helped these gentlemen in the capacity of secretary. These people-I want to point out "these people"-not just the college of heralds, worked at this matter for many months. I have read the correspondence involved and some of the proceedings. They thought this matter out very carefully, and as we look at the centre block of this parliament today and see the beauty of the heraldry there is in this building, in the entrances and porticos and elevator doors we can see the handiwork of a group of people who were looking a long way ahead. I hope Canadians will not think of this flag as being a creation of a government, because I do not think it is; I think it is the most honest search possible for what is distinctly and clearly and uniquely our own.
The arms of Canada were proclaimed by George V on November 21, 1921 at the request of the government headed by the Right Hon. Arthur Meighen pursuant to the recommendation of the arms committee set up by Sir Robert Borden's government on March 26, 1919. I ask you to note this, gentlemen, that a flag was flown on Confederation square in Ottawa to celebrate the royal visit of 1939. This flag was flown in a place of honour, and it showed three maple leaves conjoined on a white field. This was immediately prior to the war, and at this time Ottawa had this insignia emblazened up and down its streets. Some hon. members may care to look at the Illustrated London News of May 27, 1939, particularly pages 988 and 989, in this connection.
Then there was the Canadian active service force flag which was adopted by the war cabinet and militia council on December 7, 1939, as the battle flag for the commander, 1st Canadian division, and later presented to George VI. This is referred to, incidentally, in the last edition of "Flags of the World", edited by H. Gresham Carr. It is perhaps
Canadian Flag
rather presumptuous for an author to say this, but he says in this book:
After due consideration, the writer ventures to suggest that a flag similar to that designed for the Canadian active service force in 1939 might well be adopted as a new national flag.
This book dilates on the fact that our own system of flags has really fallen pretty much into disarray. In that flag there was a union jack in canton. This was included apparently because of the natural tradition and relationship of Canada to Great Britain and the fact that our forces were going to be in the United Kingdom for some period. Also on the flag, and to the right were the three traditional fleur-de-lis, which incidentally are also part of all British heraldry but the basic flag was three red maple leaves conjoined on a white field. Respecting the fleur-de-lis I think that having burned the Maid of Orleans in the 15th century and having discovered that she was such a saintly creature, the British thereafter did everything they could to appropriate her symbolism as their own.
Then there is the officers' hat badge of the Canadian Women's Army Corps, 1942; the Canadian Infantry Corps cap and collar badge, 1943-1951; the badge of No. 5 initial training school, R.C.A.F., 1943; the badge of H.M.C.S. Donnacona, being the naval division, Montreal. Then there is the Canada Medal, 1943. That had three maple leaves on one stem. There is the badge of the famous 405 R.C.A.F. fighter squadron, adopted in 1946; the ship's badge of H.M.C.S. La Hulloise, a frigate; the war service lapel button for military service during 1939-1945, adopted in 1946; the cap and collar badges of army officers on the general list below lieutenant-colonel, 1946; the Canadian Army badge, which I have been told was actually chosen by George VI himself in 1947. That badge consists of three maple leaves, two crossed swords and the crown. Then there is the Canadian forces decoration. A good many hon. members of the opposition who are not happy about this emblem that is being suggested wear the Canadian forces decoration.


Mr. Churchill:: We like the emblem, but not as a flag.


John Ross Matheson: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. gentleman for his intervention. I respect the hon. gentleman; he is not only decorated but is a veteran of two wars. However, I would point out to him that flags are a specialized form of heraldry and when we are discussing flags and heraldry it is really the same subject. Unless a flag in some

Canadian Flag
respects conforms to tradition, we might as well follow, if you like, the republican ideas of some people and break with the past. For my part, I hope that will not happen.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John Ross Matheson: If my hon. friend would look at the Canadian forces decoration when he goes home tonight he will notice that it is a very beautiful medal, one of the finest we have ever struck. He will notice the three maple leaves conjoined on one side and a portrait of Elizabeth on the other. Then there is the Prince Edward Island regiment's cap and collar badges and button adopted in 1950; the Canadian general senior cap and collar badges and button adopted between 1955 and 1961; the revised emblazon-to answer the comments of the last speaker- of the arms of Canada as announced by the Hon. Ellen Fairclough, secretary of state, on October 8, 1957. I think it would be worth while if hon. gentlemen would take the trouble to read that announcement. Then we find the Canadian Guards cap badge and buttons of 1947. The button has the three maple leaves and around it the motto "A mari usque ad mare". The cap badge has three red maple leaves conjoined on a white field. The other evening the Prime Minister mentioned the beautiful illuminated version of the Canadian Bill of Rights of August 10, 1960, signed by the then prime minister, now the right hon. Leader of the Opposition. It displays not only the full armourial achievement, but under the styling the three red maple leaves conjoined just as they appear on the proposed flag, the same three red maple leaves as they appear on the history of world war II, the three volume edition of "Canadians Serving Overseas".
Then-and this is a pretty compelling argument, to me at least-on Her Majesty's personal royal banner as Queen of Canada there is featured the three red maple leaves on a white field, and this was created by Her Majesty on August 15, 1962. Actually the l/42nd or the l/48th part-depending on how you measure it-of the Canadian red ensign is the three red maple leaves on one stem. This incidentally is the only part of the ensign alluding to Canada.
Certain hon. gentlemen have suggested that we are dishonouring the past by trying to support this kind of recommendation. I would ask them as they leave the chamber at six o'clock tonight to go over to this rather famous statue of Sir John A. Macdonald to the east of the Senate entrance where they

will find below the statue the emblazoning of the great seal of Canada in which this device appears in the position of honour twice. I would ask them also to examine question No. 1,449 asked of the former government, when under date of February 5, 1963 I was advised by a Conservative ministry that our national emblem was three maple leaves conjoined on one stem with the colours red and white, and this by royal proclamation.


Gordon Minto Churchill: What royal proclamation is this?


John Ross Matheson: The royal proclamation was the proclamation to which I referred of November 21, 1921. This is really the juridical foundation of Canada's symbolism. There are two dates of very considerable consequence in our heraldry. There are the royal warrants of Victoria of 1868. Then we jump to the royal proclamation of 1921. But before 1868 and after 1921 there were many steps taken by military and civil authorities and by the college of heralds tending to confirm us in our use of symbolic devices.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I do not like to interrupt, but the hon. member's speech is very informative, and I do this with the best of motives. In the royal proclamation of November 21, 1921, what colour was assigned to the maple leaves? Second, are the colours red and white designated therein as the colours for Canada?


John Ross Matheson: No. I thank the hon. gentleman for this useful and helpful intervention. I should have touched on this because it was referred to by the hon. member for Waterloo North (Mr. Weichel). The colours which were assigned to Canada in the proclamation of November 21, 1921 were the colours white and red. These were set out in two places, the wreath of the liveries and again in the mantelling. The shield itself consists of actually five components. At the top there are the quarterings, which are the Plantagenet lions of England-the lion rampant of Scotland, the harp of Ireland and fleur-de-lis of France, which I am happy this committee was wise enough to bring back into our heraldry, because it has been lost since the battle of Culloden, when both protagonists used the fleur-de-lis as part of their standards, both the Hanoverians and the Jacobites. This was brought back with great pride by the authorities in England. In the base, the position of honour or distinction for Canada, were three maple leaves on a

white field. Those maple leaves were painted green. The wording of the grant used the words proper, which in their heraldic sense mean "in their natural state". We are told that in its natural state a maple leaf could be green, gold or red.
With regard to green maple leaves on a white field, perhaps my hon. friend as a privy councillor has had that kind of shield in his office in the past. This shield was depicted in many of the earlier exemplifications as being green. Actually they can be found in the ceiling of the Senate chamber. But this was corrected in 1957. At that time I believe my hon. friend was a member of the government, and this was corrected in an announcement by Hon. Ellen Fairclough. This satisfied a lot of experts in this field who had been very much distressed that our arms did not conform, for instance, with the grant of the Canadian army badge, which was granted by King George VI in 1947. You will recall that the 1st division adopted a flag of three red leaves on white in 1939. It appeared clear to all those who were devotees of the heraldic arts that the pattern had to be white and red. You see this in the colours of the Royal Military College of course. You see them in the early medal ribbons to which I have referred of the 1899 period.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Are the words actually in the proclamation though?


Neil Alexander Matheson: The colours are set out as white and red. Perhaps my hon. friend would permit me to send him a copy of the material, because he might care to go into the corrections which were effected by Hon. Ellen Fairclough in her announcement. This was confirmed by the subsequent act of Her Majesty in her exemplification of her royal banner, which I have examined at the College of Arms in England and which has three red maple leaves on a white field in base. This was done in 1962, whether or not as a result of consultation with his government I do not know. I think It would simply be done on the basis of the heraldic instructions which had been received as a result of the royal proclamation.
May I call it five o'clock, Mr. Speaker.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Order. It being five o'clock the house will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business, as listed on today's order paper, namely notices of motions and public bills.
Expansion of Social Security SOCIAL SECURITY



SUGGESTED EXPANSION OF LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

Stanley Howard Knowles: That, in the opinion of this house, the government should give immediate consideration, in consultation with the provinces, to the advisability of filling the major gaps in this country's social security program, including medicare, the provision of income maintenance during illness, pensions for widows dependant children, adequate survivors' benefits, and retirement pensions, when necessary, at sixty years of age, as well as to the advisability of improving legislation already in effect, so that Canada's social security system might be as complete and comprehensive as this country's economy now makes possible.
He said: Mr. Speaker, it is an interesting coincidence that at five o'clock on each of the days thus far that we have been debating a national flag for Canada, an item under private members' business regarding some measure of social security has come up for debate. On Monday we had a resolution having to do with the Disabled Persons Act. Yesterday we had a bill relating to the war veterans of world war I. Today we have this resolution of mine calling for some very definite steps forward in the whole field of social security.
In connection with the debate on the flag we are thinking about this country's future. Frequent references are made to getting ready for an adequate celebration of our 100th birthday three years from now. It seems to me that the terms of this resolution suggest a very specific and concrete way in which we might really try to grow up as a nation by the time we are 100 years old. I hope that whatever else we may do to celebrate our centenary we will make every effort to strengthen and improve our social security system so that it will be as complete and comprehensive as this country's economy now makes possible.


Mr. Basford:: We will.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I have often made speeches in various parts of the country concerning the progress we have made in Canada in the field of social security, and it is one of the facts of our history that we have made some progress.


Stanley Ronald Basford: Under a Liberal government.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Hon. members will not be surprised if I say to them that I have indicated with some pride the part that our predecessors, speaking for this party, and that some of us in this party, have played

Expansion of Social Security in prodding whatever government has been in power to put social security legislation on the statute books. This country will never forget, and indeed it never should forget, the debt that it owes to my predecessor, the former member for Winnipeg North Centre, the late J. S. Woodsworth, for the part he played nearly 40 years ago in prodding the government of that day to place upon the statute books our first old age pension act. But, Mr. Speaker, even after we catalogue the things we have on our statute books that come under the heading of social security legislation, such as old age pensions, family allowances, pensions for the blind, pensions for the disabled, unemployment insurance, benefits of various kinds for our veterans-


Stanley Ronald Basford: All Liberal measures.


Stanley Howard Knowles: -I want to say quite frankly that I do not think we really have very much to boast about. In terms of the affluence of our society, in terms of the amount of wealth we are capable of producing, in terms of what we can make available for certain kinds of projects, the speed with which we can raise money for war, if necessary, the way we can raise money for other projects-in the light of all that I submit we are really not doing very well in this terribly important human field, the field of social security. I urge very strongly, if we are concerned about our image as a nation in the eyes of the world, if we are concerned about having a country over which we can proudly fly whatever flag we choose, that we pay very serious attention to filling the gaps in our social security program and to improving the pieces of legislation we already have on the statute books.
In the resolution itself I refer specifically to some of the gaps. The first one I mention is medicare. It is only a couple of years ago, of course, that this was a very warm subject in one of the provinces of this country. Some people thought that the government of that province was away ahead of its time in what it was endeavouring to put on the statute books of that province, but in a matter of months medicare became a part of the platform of most of the political parties of this country. I suggest that we really will not be a civilized country, we will really not be showing concern for the country and for the human beings who make up our country, until we have a program of medicare for all citizens of this country. Just as it took participation by the federal government along with the provinces to get hospitalization on a na-
[Mr. Knowles.1
tion-wide basis, so it will take participation by the federal government in a program of medicare if we are to get legislation of this kind for all our people.
Another gap that we must soon try to fill is that of providing income maintenance to persons who are unemployed because of illness. This has long been one of the main weaknesses in our unemployment insurance legislation, namely that when people are unemployed because of illness there is no unemployment insurance benefit for them. Oh, we improved the act a few years ago in one slight respect. We now provide that if a person becomes unemployed because there is no job for him, is healthy at the time, starts drawing his unemployment insurance benefits and later becomes ill, he can continue to draw his unemployment insurance benefits. But for those who are unable to go to work because of illness there is no general program for the maintenance of income. This is a very serious gap in our social security legislation.
The next two references in my resolution are to widows with dependant children and survivors generally. I welcome the fact that tomorrow we shall be considering the proposed amendment to the British North America Act, otherwise known as the constitution of Canada, under which we hope to be able to bring in the revised version of the Canada pension plan which will include, as we now understand it, provisions for widows of certain ages and widows with dependant children. This is good. We are glad to know we are moving in this direction. But even after we enact the proposals that have been placed before us in certain documents that have been laid on the table I suggest we will still have a long way to go.
Then there is the whole question of the age at which pensions are payable. At the moment the only age at which one can get an old age pension with no means test is 70. Under the new Canada pension plan it will be possible to get a pension at age 65 but for a great many people, particularly for women but also for many men, the fact remains that there are times when that pension is needed at age 60. I think we are going to have to consider this whole question in these terms. This is one of the areas that I feel should be receiving close attention. This is one of the gaps that needs to be filled.
Our unemployment insurance legislation needs to be overhauled. We have been assured that this is being considered, but like some other things under this slow moving

government we have, we seem to have to wait and wait and wait.
One of the phrases or slogans, Mr. Speaker, that is current these days is an interesting one, "The war on poverty". President Johnson of the United States has declared such a war on poverty in his country. It is a slogan, as I say, that many speakers both in and out of politics are using these days. It is a good phrase; it is capturing our imagination. It is my contention that we should do something about it, and that the place to begin a war on poverty is by filling in the gap in our social security legislation, by improving the social and economic position of those people who are suffering from the effects of poverty.
Most members are aware of the book that Michael Harrington wrote, entitled "The Other America", in which he pointed out the existence of poverty in that country. I have in my hand a pamphlet by Dwight Macdonald entitled, "Our Invisible Poor", which is more or less a summary of what Mr. Harrington set out in his book. Mr. Macdonald points out that it is Mr. Harrington's estimate that between 40 and 50 million people in the United States or about one quarter of the population of that country are now living in poverty. If that is the case in the United States, since in most respects the figures for Canada run about 10 per cent of those for the United States, it would follow that there could be between four million and five million Canadians who are living in poverty as defined by people like Michael Harrington and Dwight Macdonald, a definition which is accepted by President Johnson and by others.
Not long ago there appeared an interesting article in the Toronto Daily Star. It appeared in the issue of that paper dated Saturday, March 14, 1964. This article was entitled, "Canada: 3,000,000 Poor". The author is Dr. Albert Rose. I should like to read a few sentences from the paragraph preceding this article:
How many poor people are there In Canada?
One of the most respected social scientists in Canada, Dr. Albert Rose, professor of social work at the University of Toronto, said recently there may be 3,000,000 Canadians-as many as one out of six-who can't afford a minimum adequate standard of living.
Then, there follows the article by Dr. Rose. It is interesting that when he sets out the categories under which one finds these people who make up his estimate of three million poor Canadians, these are the categories: The unemployed, the disabled, widows
Expansion of Social Security or deserted mothers with dependant children, unmarried mothers with dependant children, children in the care of children's aid societies or institutions, blind persons and aged persons. This is a very interesting article which I commend to members generally. I should like to read just one paragraph:
As yet in Canada, there has not been sufficient research to document the extent of poverty more clearly. A reasonable estimate might be that the "self-supporting poor" are at least twice as numerous as the group in dire poverty, at least 2,000,000 persons. Canada's "poor" population, then, may number a total of 3,000,000, as many as one in six persons.
This is a rather sad picture, Mr. Speaker, and it is significant we are called upon to face that fact for this hour during a day when we are debating the kind of flag we want to fly over our country. The other day my leader said that what was very important was the kind of country over which the flag would fly. It is not a very happy thought that any flag would fly over a country such as Canada in 1964 in which an outstanding social scientist could say there are three million poor, perhaps more. I urge that we make an attack on this problem of poverty at the point where poverty exists. We can do it by overhauling our social security legislation, by regarding this as a task that cannot wait. We are in an affluent society in some respects. The capacity for producing wealth is great. We have automation and we have cybernation.
There was an interesting suggestion made in Charlottetown the other day by David M. Winch, assistant professor of economics at the University of Alberta, when discussing the possible impact of automation on the economy. He said that perhaps the time has come to provide a minimum allowance for everyone to spread the income amongst all our people. The idea is gradually gaining some currency that the day will come when we may have to pay people for doing no work at all because the machines will have taken the work away from us. We may be paying people and encouraging them, in every possible way, to live in cultural ways and play their part in helping others.
The social legislation we have put on our statute books does record the progress we have made in 50 or 60 years, but compared with the needs of our people, compared with our capacity, we have only begun. To put some meaning into the whole effort to produce the kind of social security legislation which would make us proud, we have to do
4422	HOUSE OF
Expansion of Social Security a good deal more than we have up until the present time. Therefore, I present this resolution to the house and hope the house may see fit to let it come to a vote in this hour. I urge that this house approve of the proposition. If we are going to adopt a flag to fly over our country, let us have a country in which we have done everything we can for our people. We can do it if we will try to improve our social security legislation as I have suggested in this resolution.


Mr. J. C. Munro (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, it was very interesting to listen to the comments of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), and particularly interesting to hear him refer to Mr. Harrington's book, "The Other America", or poverty in the United States. He mentioned that one of the ways of combating poverty was to overhaul our social security system.
I believe I can point out that the activities this government has undertaken in the last year have gone a considerable distance in this direction. The hon. member said something about a slow moving government, but when you consider what we have done in this period of a little over a year, perhaps the Canadian people will not think the government has been as slow as all that.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am all ears.


John Carr Munro: That is fine; I believe that, although the hon. member's speeches have been helpful on many occasions, it cannot be said the hon. member is any more innocent of contributing to delays in furthering legislation during the last year than any other hon. member in this house.
There was one thing in Mr. Harrington's book that the hon. member did not mention and which was his basic thesis, as I understood it after reading the book. It is true he said that social security in the United States had to be revised in order to get down to the economic underworld of the United States, as he termed it, but he also put tremendous emphasis on education.
The hon. member referred to the fact that in the United States, progressively with automation and the wealth and affluence of that society, fewer and fewer people would be indulging in extensive work and undertaking the hours of work which they do now. This is quite true and it is only through education that the problem can be coped with. Mr. Harrington pointed out that the United States primarily has to examine itself and its af-

fluence to determine what share of that wealth must be directed towards educating its people, so that those people who, from generation to generation are becoming more enmeshed in the economic underworld and have no opportunity of breaking through, can be assisted. He stated that this can only be done by the federal government primarily undertaking a very extensive program of educating these masses, some 30 million to 50 million people, and further that this would require tremendous expenditures by the federal government.
Therefore overhauling the social security system is only one area that has to be tackled. I do not think it was ever suggested that overhauling the social security system in the United States would anywhere near cope with the real problem. If people do have more leisure time it is all right for those who have jobs, but for the people who have no work at all, he questions very seriously whether an overhaul of the social security system is going to do very much good unless it is accompanied hand in hand with a whole new outlook by the federal government towards education. I am talking not of academic or classical education but primarily of technical education.
I do not think social security should be regarded as all important in tackling this problem, especially in view of some of the gaps in social security programs which have been filled over the last year or so. In saying that, I do not mean at all to de-empha-size some of the gaps which the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) pointed out, but I think a review of some of the things that have been done should be put on the record.
1.	In the past year we have increased the amount of old age security. I am not suggesting that the government takes sole credit for this. Without the help of other groups in the house it could not have been passed, but it has been done. The amount has been increased by $10 a month for those people over 70 years, and this is certainly an improvement.
2.	Blind persons allowances have also been increased by $10 a month.


Mr. Boutin:: Would the hon. member allow me a question?


John Carr Munro: Would you repeat that, please?


Pierre-André Boutin: The hon. member has just stated that his party has increased old age security benefits by $10 a month. Does he not think that in doing so, the government worked against the other classes of society, since it raised personal income tax by 1 per cent to help the aged? It imposed a burden on those workers who must pay for such assistance.


John Carr Munro: Mr. Speaker, in reply to the question I would suggest that the funds necessary to pay this have to come from taxes in some form or another. There can be a great argument on economic grounds as to which is the most equitable way to raise these funds, and I think we must take into account that an increase in corporation taxes was levied in order to pay for old age security benefits. I do not know whether the hon. member has taken that into account.
In a period of little over a year we have increased the amount of old age security, and raised blind persons allowances.
3.	We have increased disabled pensions by $10 a month.
4.	The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre referred to the Canada pension plan. With the implementation of this plan some of the most serious gaps are going to be filled, and I would point out to the house that the constitutional amendment necessary for the Canada pension plan will be brought before us tomorrow.
5.	To a considerable extent this plan will help the widows with dependant children, and the orphans to which the hon. member referred.
6.	I hope and understand it will also make some allowance for the hardship imposed by funeral costs, which many people find very onerous.
7.	Further, the government has indicated it regards as a priority measure, and hopes to deal with it in this session, the extension of family allowances, which to some extent will contribute to the over-all cure that the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre did not mention, but which is referred to in Harrington's book. This will at least give some encouragement to those of our children who want to go on to higher education.
8.	There is also the question of interest free loans, which generally falls within this area, interest free loans for students who wish to acquire a higher education. Some of
Expansion of Social Security these measures I have mentioned have already been implemented. Others are regarded by the government as priority legislation for consideration at this session, and taken together they go a long way towards filling many of the gaps.
9.	The hon. member mentioned, so far as welfare legislation is concerned, that pensions under the Canada pension plan will now be available at 65 years. This in itself goes a long way to fill in what undeniably is a serious gap. Therefore I think that the government and all the parties that have helped to pass this legislation can take some considerable pride in these measures.
10.	Another point to which the hon. member referred was what he termed medicare. It is true that the Liberal party had health care in its program, and this will go a long way to alleviate the hardship of those Canadians who, because of low incomes or unemployment, cannot afford proper medical attention. This is part of our program which will be implemented. We are committed to implementing it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: When?


John Carr Munro: The hon. member has been told that in answer to several questions. He knows about the royal commission on health services, and it would be foolish for the government not to await the findings of that commission and make an extensive study of them before bringing in proposals with respect to health care.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That was the answer a year ago.


John Carr Munro: Then that must have been about the first question which the hon. member put to us when we assumed office. The commission was considering its report then. Is the hon. member suggesting that we should go ahead and bring in a detailed plan without taking into account the tremendous research that has been done by this royal commission? Surely he is not suggesting that? Surely it is sensible to study this report to find out how the recommendations which seem to be most feasible can be implemented? We are told that the time is not far off when this report will be made available, and we look forward to receiving it.
I would think that in the normal life of a parliament-and sooner if at all possible-* if a medicare program can be brought down then it, taken in conjunction with the proposals already implemented by this parliament, and in conjunction with those which
4424	HOUSE OF
Expansion of Social Security the government indicates it considers as priorities, will fill many of the gaps in our social security system.
There are other areas that should be taken into account in such a review. There is our hospital legislation, and our veterans allowance legislation is currently under review. In that respect I suggest that we in the Liberal party cannot relax our efforts in furthering social welfare legislation. We do not deny that we need the help and assistance of those in other parties in this house who have advocated these measures for so long, but it would be a mistake to think that the true and sole concern for many of these people rests in any one group. I think this party has indicated its sincere concern for these people, and the government has a record of showing this concern. It has proved its concern, as the legislative records of this country will show.
There is one other area of activity with which the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre will, I am sure, be familiar. I refer to the various welfare conferences which have been held under the direction of my hon. friend and colleague the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Miss LaMarsh) since this government took office. All the deputy ministers of welfare met here in Ottawa on February 14 and 15 and the meeting reconvened on May 28 and 29. Many proposals for an extensive review of our social security programs were considered at these meetings. These proposals are now receiving intensive study not only by the federal government but at provincial level. These arrangements are, of course, based on the acknowledgement that the provincial governments have extensive jurisdiction in this field and must be consulted. Thus, to say that we are slow in moving in this area is a harsh judgment indeed. We all know that in dealing with problems which go to the heart of the federal-provincial relationship, a number of meetings must be held before agreement can be established. One is dealing with various points of view which must, inevitably, be expressed by representatives of ten different provinces, and these things just cannot be done overnight. I think we can all be thoroughly satisfied, in the light of the conferences which have been held to date, that a sincere effort has been made to arrive at a consensus expressed by all the provinces, which consensus is necessary before proceeding with a review of our social security arrangements so as to fill some of the gaps [Mr. Munro.l

to which the hon. member has called our attention.
I will not continue any further. I would simply place on record, again, the fact that this government is carrying on the very activities which the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre is recommending in his resolution.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, the remarks of the parliamentary secretary were not too encouraging. In my opinion, they were lacking in precision. The resolution introduced by the hon. member on my left is very important.
We would have liked to know from the government at what time the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) will announce to the house the convening of a federal-provincial conference to consider as soon as possible which steps should be taken for a complete overhaul of our social security program in order that part of the medical costs be paid jointly by the governments and that the latter increase the pension paid to widows with dependant children.
What is it waiting for to grant a pension to citizens 60 years of age? We would have liked the representative of the Minister of the National Health and Welfare to tell us what exactly the government proposes to do. It is very fine to speak of former action taken by the various governments in power, but it does not fill the present gaps in the social security field.
Mr. Speaker, Canada is, with the United States, one of the countries with the highest standard of living. We have the means and revenue to fill those gaps and rectify the unfair deal to the widows and people of 69 or more, who are not getting any pension now. The government spends fabulous sums for maintaining a Canadian force in Cyprus- and I am not against it-but, if we have the means to meet the whole cost of maintaining our troops in Cyprus, without its being defrayed by the United Nations as a whole, we also have enough revenue to pay those medical expenses.
I wonder why the government does not, as soon as possible, introduce some legislation providing at least a pension for the people of 60 and over. At this time, with automation, with our young people who have a trade, everybody knows that it is impossible for any Canadian citizen to find work after the age of 45. We have, in our statutes, no legislation to force private enterprise to give

employment to people of 45 and over, as is the case in New York state.
With regard to this matter, I think that the government imposes some restrictions with regard to the penitentiaries under federal jurisdiction by refusing employment to people over 45 years of age. Now, I think it is disgraceful to act like that.
We should see to it that our pension system is revised as soon as possible, even at this session, in order that persons who are 60 years old may receive their pension.
Mr. Speaker, I also think that medical expenses should be paid, partly, by the government. And our citizens should assume their responsibilities and part of the medical expenses, even if it is only a small amount, should be paid by the person being treated, so that it cannot be said that the government is paying for everything, is giving everything free, for we all know that nothing is free, and so that nobody can say: we do not have to pay. We know that whenever something is free, the poorer classes always pay through direct or indirect taxes.
Mr. Speaker, the social legislation put in our statute books by the various governments is fine but it does not go far enough and it would seem that our democracy is afraid to cross the threshold and adopt a measure providing for pensions at age 60. All hon. members say that each week end people come to ask their recommendation for a job. It is impossible to find employment for persons of 45 and over, even if they have a trade. In my opinion, it is the duty of the government to protect that class of citizens, to bring in legislation to correct such an injustice and to provide for the payment of a pension for all Canadians who have reached the age of 60.


Mr. Jean-Louis Frenette (Porlneuf):: Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), I consider as a striking coincidence the fact that we should be considering this resolution right after this afternoon's debate on the adoption of a distinctive national flag. This reminds me of a remark one of my fellow citizens made to me last week. He seemed to feel that th government and the members of parliament were giving too much consideration to the adoption of a national flag and none at all to the improvement of the lot of the destitute and the needy.
We are all agreed with the hon. member who presented this notice of motion that it is absolutely necessary, and it is becoming more and more urgent, to revise completely
Expansion of Social Security our policy in regard to social security legislation.
We are noticing every day how some of our citizens are ill provided for, how they lack financial resources for various reasons and, unfortunately, they are still ignored by those who have the responsibility of legislating to bring relief to the misery of others.
The notice of motion covers, of course, a very large field and we could very well stray far away from social security measures, but I think we will shortly have the opportunity of considering fully a measure which will permit us to make some suggestions as to the best means to improve our social legislation. As a matter of fact, we are told that a motion will be introduced tomorrow to amend the Canadian constitution in a way which as we hope, will allow setting up a pension scheme beneficial to all Canadian citizens.
Mr. Speaker, we agree to discuss this item of social legislation, and it is no secret for anybody that the political group to which I belong has, since its inception I would say, vigorously advocated some improvement in our social legislation, more particularly with regard to the welfare of our older citizens, of those who have gone before us and made Canada the pleasant place we live in today.
For a long time, Social Credit has thought about improving the lot of those people and, at this stage, I would like to read a quotation to prove my argument. It is an excerpt from a manifesto of the Canadian Social Credit organization in the 1962 election. This is what it says:
Social Credit believes that Canadians owe to their older citizens a better deal than the one they get today. Those people have built this country, working much more lor less than any salary paid today. Moreover, those who have taken what, in their day, seemed to be a reasonable care of their old age, have been shamelessly robbed by price inflation. Canadians owe them a compensation lor what the devaluation of the dollar robbed them of.
In 1931, a worker was earning $1,100 a year, and an insurance policy of $5,000 meant a considerable amount of savings. Today, those $5,000 are hardly worth more than $2,650 and the income earned by any worker for 41 years now represents his average salary for less than nine months.
Older citizens in Canada have another cause for worry: the high cost of medical services and medicine at present is often beyond their means, yet they know that they will need them more and more in their later years.
Even the monthly $75 pension granted like all the increased pensions, during an election year, is evidently inadequate to provide even a simple standard of living to those who, through hard work, have built the country that permits us to make a living today, and that gives us good earnings-provided you are employed-for much less work than in bygone days.

Expansion of Social Security
Canada could also afford to pay a pension to people aged 65 years or more who do not work full time, and to grant them medical care. The aims of Social Credit, as concerns assistance to the aged, would be:
1.	An insurance plan for medical care paid by the government to any person over 65 years of age.
2.	The qualifying age for old age pension would be lowered to 65 years for all those whose yearly income is below the income tax exemption level.
3.	The pension rate for aged people would be increased.
Mr. Speaker, this proves to hon. members that our group has always been concerned with social legislation.
Also, as the hon. member said in his notice of motion, amendments should be provided in the legislation granting a pension to disabled persons or to others affected by some ailment and condemned to remain inactive.
Here, I would like to recall, in a few words, an intervention, which I found particularly clever, from the hon. member for Berthier-Maskinonge-Delanaudiere (Mr. Paul) on Monday last, when he said, as mentioned on page 4317 of Hansard:
Mr. Speaker, I feel the government should make the necessary changes to broaden the scope of the act or to make its benefits more readily available because, as I said a while ago, it often happens that a person who suffers from diabetes, asthma or heart trouble cannot qualify for a pension under the Disabled Persons Act.
Mr. Speaker, it seems that this matter of amending our social legislation meets with unanimous approval, and I am a little disappointed-not that I want to blame anyone -to see the small number of members in the house to discuss as important a matter as the one which is now under consideration. I am often absent myself, but I sincerely believe that if all hon. members wanted to make the effort, they could take more interest in the study of such matters. Then they would be more justified, during election campaigns, to talk at length about that matter and even to use in a most deplorable demagogic manner other people's miseries.
Mr. Speaker, we are lucky to live in such a rich country as Canada and I think that it would be an insult to the Creator and to Providence if we were unable to organize in order to take advantage of the many resources which were given to us.
I have here a comparative table of the salaries paid to workmen in various countries of the world. I know that this comparison is somewhat unsatisfactory, but I think that the salary level nevertheless gives a rather accurate idea of the standards of living which exist in those various countries. I see that

Canada is second, with an average salary of $1.89 an hour; this brings me to make a comparison with some measures of social security now in effect in other countries much less favoured than ours. Like the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre I feel that it is urgent to act, instead of just talking and using the question for political purposes.
A few weeks ago, the Gospel reminded us of the parable of the lost sheep, in which we see that the good shepherd, when he realizes that one of his sheep is missing, must leave the others to go and look for the one which needs his care.
That parable, I think, could inspire those who are governing us and remind them that it is not really the people who have everything from the point of view of wealth and security that they should be worried about, but those who are in want, although not necessarily poverty striken, and who are quite unable to meet the requirements imposed upon them by their responsibilities.
We should help the poor and the needy a great deal more. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) referred a while ago to the figure of about $3 million. In my opinion, that is an eloquent figure which deserves our attention in view of its importance.
A while ago, the hon. member for Dorchester (Mr. Boutin) asked the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Munro) if he was taking into account the increase in income tax compared with the increase in old age pensions, the pensions to the blind and others. I noted that the hon. member did not try too hard to give a better answer than was necessary. This leads me to ask the following question: If the Canadian parliament were not called upon to pay today, merely in interest, an amount of a billion dollars a year, would it not be easier then to establish social welfare legislation which would protect our fellow citizens from difficulties.
I conclude my remarks by leaving this thought to hon. members' meditation. Let us try to find a means to eliminate this huge interest of approximately a billion dollars and then distribute this same amount, according to need, to those who are now living in insecurity and poverty.
I hope earnestly that this notice of motion will come to a vote, so that we can be aware of those who really want to ensure the welfare of their fellow citizens and who have a real sense of responsibility as the people's representatives.


Pierre-André Boutin: Mr. Speaker, of the five minutes remaining for the discussion of this notice of motion, I shall take only three, so that in the last two minutes, we may bring to a vote the resolution introduced by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles).
For many years, Social Credit has been advocating the principle contained in this motion. As a matter of fact, it says that consideration should be given to reducing the age of old age pensioners to 60. I feel that legislation to this end could be enacted by the present government even this year, if it introduced a measure designed to pay old age pensions as from 60 years of age.
However, in order to ensure the security of a certain class of society we should not, as a result, increase the insecurity of other classes of society in this country. This is somewhat related to the question I directed earlier to the parliamentary secretary to the minister, namely that if the old age security pension is increased, the government by the same token, and we had that evidence not very long ago, increases the insecurity of another class of society, since in the same piece of legislation a 1 per cent increase in the personal income tax was also introduced.
With the present system, I wonder where all this will lead us to if, in order to get elected, political parties advocate a further increase in social security.
Under the present system, we know, and the Liberal party has proved it, that by increasing security, insecurity becomes greater by the same token.
Would it not be more advisable for the government to consider looking elsewhere to obtain the necessary funds to pay for that security.
As the hon. member for Portneuf (Mr. Frenette) said earlier, if only the interest paid on the national debt were used and made available to the Canadian people to pay social security, we would then have enough funds to increase and even double family allowances throughout Canada.
We are not asking the government to double family allowances, but to distribute the amount we pay in interest on the debt of Canada on security measures for all Canadian citizens. And this somewhat follows the proposal made by the hon. member who introduced this motion, that is, the advisability of improving legislation already in effect. In order to improve our social security legislation according to the economy of the country-surely, resources are not lacking in
Expansion of Social Security Canada-all we have to know is how to organize our economy in order to develop those resources so that every Canadian can be given more security.
Here, I would point out that the federal government raised the old age pension by $10 last fall, but surely, it is not the old people in the province of Quebec who benefited from that, because Mr. Lesage, with his regime of grandeur, managed to cut by $10 a certain security given to the aged. Therefore, they are still getting the same amount of $75 they were receiving before the $10 increase given by the federal government.
I leave the last two minutes to the house so that we can take the vote.
tText]


Mr. Lloyd Francis (Carleion):: Mr. Speaker, in the little time which remains I should like to say a few words on the motion. Just over 20 years ago the late Lord Beveridge published a report on social insurance and allied services. At that time he put forward a minimum standard of security, and I know that the hon. member who has introduced this motion has worked carefully towards this since that time. But there has been a shift in our thinking and in our objectives in our approach to the problem. The terms of the motion provide a major income maintenance program, such as pensions for widows with dependant children, survivors benefits, retirement pensions, etc. This is a requirement of a major attack on poverty. That is the inference which I draw from the remarks of the hon. member, which were at a very high level. There was no reference to meeting the problems of constitutional adjustment or negotiation with the provinces, although there is reference to it in the resolution.
The problem of a government which is responsible for the implementation of legislation is one of priority. I have listened in this house, Mr. Speaker, to priorities which have been urged by the hon. member. On one occasion it is t.b. and mental institutions. On another occasion it is the improvement of disability programs. On another occasion it is the problem of housing. All of these are highly desirable, Mr. Speaker. But the government of the day have certain basic objectives in mind. The first and foremost objective is a high level of employment, productivity and income. The second objective is a national measure of the distribution of the results of the productivity of the economy. This calls to mind the unfortunate fact that to do this

Business of the House
we have to raise taxes, and the level of taxation and the means of raising more taxes suggests that these priorities have to be followed, and everything cannot be done at once.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Order. The hour appointed for the consideration of private members' business has expired.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Gordon Minto Churchill: Might I ask the acting house leader what is the business for tomorrow and Friday, and if he can forecast the business for Monday as well it would be helpful.


Mr. MacNaught:: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we will be considering the address in relation to the constitutional amendment. When that is finished, whatever time remains this week will be taken up with the debate going on prior to five o'clock. On Monday we will be, as far as I know at this moment, continuing with the flag debate.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Unless it is carried before that.


John Watson MacNaught: I hope so. I hope I will be mistaken.


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


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secrelary of Slate for External Affairs: Mr. Speaker, I know that the house would wish me to report on the results of the UN conference on trade and development which met in Geneva over the past twelve weeks and which ended yesterday.
The house will recall that this conference was called to consider how trade can play a greater part in the economic development of the less developed countries. If the pace of development in these countries is to gather sufficient momentum, they will need to increase their imports of capital goods and raw materials. These growing import requirements must be financed in large measure from their own export earnings. In actual fact, the less developed countries have experienced a continuing decline in their share of world trade and their export earnings have not provided them with resources commensurate with their import needs. It was to these problems that representatives of 119 countries addressed themselves in Geneva. I attended the opening ministerial session of this conference, and the statement which I made to the conference outlining the Canadian position on the issues involved has been tabled in the house.
The house will appreciate that these are complex and difficult problems for which solutions cannot be evolved at a single conference. What the conference has been able to do is to create greater understanding of the fundamental issues involved and to chart the course for future progress. A number of key issues emerged during the conference. One of these was the problem of how less developed countries could increase their export earnings from trade in primary commodities. Most of these countries are still dependent on a narrow range of commodities for a very large proportion of their export earnings. The conference has recommended a program of action designed to improve the terms of access to world markets for these products. It also agreed that new efforts must be made to arrive at international arrangements which would assure producers of primary commodities a more dependable source of export income.
Of course, as the house is aware, even the most effective international arrangements may
not be able to eliminate all fluctuations of commodity prices. Such fluctuations can disrupt development plans which, in the nature of things, must be based on longer term expectations of foreign exchange earnings. To help ensure that these plans can go forward without disruption, the world bank has been asked to study how these difficulties might be alleviated through new types of multilateral assistance.
The conference recognized that, however much the prospects for their traditional exports are improved, the less developed countries would come to depend increasingly on exports of the products of their new industries. This underlines the need for reductions in the barriers to world trade being made on a basis which will afford these countries the fullest possible opportunity of expanding their industrial exports. In the Kennedy round of tariff negotiations coming up in the GATT, industrialized countries will be expected to ensure that products of interest to the less developed countries are included within the scope of the negotiations without expecting full reciprocity from the less developed countries for benefits they may derive from these negotiations. As far as Canada is concerned, the likelihood of market disruption from imports of the less developed countries' manufactured goods would be lessened if there were freer access for these goods in the markets of the industrialized countries generally. There was, however, a difference of view on whether the industrialized countries should also grant tariff preferences to' the less developed countries for their exports of manufactures. This difference was not resolved and the secretary general of the United Nations has been asked to arrange for further study of this difficult issue.
The conference acknowledged that, whatever part was played by trade, the international community would have to continue to support by means of aid the efforts of the less developed countries to accelerate their rates of growth. As the house is aware, the target of the current United Nations development decade is to enable these countries to achieve a minimum annual rate of growth of 5 per cent by 1970. In view of the rapid population

increases in these countries, however, even a 5 per cent growth rate would not allow any real narrowing of the gap that now separates their standards of living from those of the advanced countries. The conference recognized that a responsibility in narrowing this gap remained with the developing countries. It also recommended measures that the international community should undertake to aid the development of the less developed countries and in this regard it recommended that each developed country endeavour, within the measure of its capability, to achieve a level of assistance that would come as close as possible to 1 per cent of its national income. The special position of capital importing countries was, however, recognized. The house may be sure that the government will give careful study to the implications of this recommendation in the light of the action which we have already taken to make substantial increases in the Canadian external aid program during the current fiscal year.
The conference also reached agreement that there should be new institutional machinery within the United Nations to carry forward the work begun at Geneva and to bring into focus the problems of trade as they affect economic development. The general assembly of the United Nations at its next session will be asked to endorse the holding of similar conferences on a regular basis and the establishment of a new trade and development board. The house will be pleased to learn that Canada, as a major trading nation, is assured of a continuing place on the new board, where it will have continuing opportunities to help find solutions to the trade
problems of the developing countries with a proper regard for the interests of other countries with more developed economies.
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian government has played a positive and constructive role in this conference. As the house is aware there had been concern, for a time, that the conference might not be able to achieve agreement on the means of dealing effectively with the issues before it. I am glad to be able to say that, in a spirit of accommodation and realism on the part of all concerned, agreement on a very wide front was achieved in the final days and hours of the conference. This, Mr. Speaker, is a good augury for the further endeavours which all countries will have to make in attacking the problem of underdevelopment. In this task the less developed countries recognize that theirs is the primary responsibility. If, however, their own efforts are to be effective they must be supplemented and supported by constructive international action. I can assure the house that, for its part, the government will study the results of the conference in that spirit and will continue to co-operate fully in further international efforts to create conditions in which the less developed countries can participate more fully in the benefits of world trade.
I would not wish to conclude my statement without paying particular tribute to Mr. Dana Wilgress, the leader of the Canadian delegation, who brought his wide experience and great understanding to bear upon the issues facing the conference and who, I know, was in no small part responsible for the success which has attended its deliberations.

Thursday, June 18, 1964