1964-09-11

Hon. Rene Tremblay (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, further to my recent statement in the house regarding Chinese immigration, and because of certain references outside the house to this subject, some questions have arisen as to the detailed application of the points I set forth.
I had spoken of a proposed termination date for status adjustment statements offered by Chinese immigrants who had committed immigration offences. It had been planned to terminate the effective date of such statements as of September 1, 1964, but subsequently I extended the time until further notice. Since my observations in the house on this subject on August 14, more than 2,500 Chinese have come forward to offer status adjustment statements.
My references at that time to the status adjustment statements had led to questions about the Chinese amnesty program, which is related to the status adjustment matter but is by no means the same thing. Status adjustment statements comprise the vehicle or the means by which certain Chinese have been able to avail themselves of the amnesty. To remove any grounds for misunderstanding I wish to explain the precise nature of the Chinese amnesty as it has been applied during the past several years.
On June 9, 1960 the government announced an amnesty effective July 1, 1960, covering illegal Chinese immigrants in Canada and also those who entered posing as Canadian citizens. It was clearly stated that the amnesty did not apply to those who had engaged in illegal immigration for a profit, or to those who helped others than their own relatives to enter Canada illegally.
On November 16, 1962 the minister of citizenship and immigration announced that much simplified procedures were being instituted to enable Chinese to make voluntary statements more readily. He reiterated 20220-498
that only those who entered before July 1, 1960 were eligible to take advantage of the amnesty. He warned that Chinese making false affidavits would be prosecuted and would be debarred from sponsoring relatives or other intending immigrants to Canada.
It will be evident that the amnesty of 1960 applied only to those offences committed before July 1, 1960. However, successive ministers have been relatively lenient with Chinese whose immigration offences occurred since 1960, even if they did not fall within the 1960 amnesty program. This period of tolerance has lasted more than four years, and I am sure all hon. members will agree that it cannot continue unduly long without seriously weakening the application of, and the respect for, our laws.
While the government has not authorized a new amnesty program, as such, beyond that of 1960, I wish to say to those Chinese who have entered Canada illegally or committed immigration offences between July 1, 1960, and September 1, 1964 that I intend to continue to be as understanding as has been the case during the past four years. I invite Chinese affected to continue to come forward to complete voluntary statements. All cases of offenders, whether they become known through these voluntary statements or otherwise, will be sympathetically reviewed. However, the government must reserve the right to prosecute for serious offences committed during this period, such as those involving immigration agents and racketeers.
I have covered the authorized procedures affecting those committing immigration offences before 1960 who may take advantage of the 1960 amnesty. I have gone on to review the situation of those affected by offences committed between July, 1960 and September, 1964 who, with the exceptions noted, will be treated tolerantly and sympathetically. For those Chinese entering illegally or committing immigration offences from September 1, 1964 onward, I must state now that their cases will be treated precisely as would those of any other racial group, and the immigration laws must be fully applicable to them.
Voluntary statements will continue to be received in the meantime from Chinese com-

Chinese Immigrants Status mitting immigration offences prior to September 1, 1964 who wish to regularize their status in Canada, but a date to conclude receipt of such statements must be determined before too long. Appropriate notice will be given when such a termination date is decided upon.


Mr. Eric A. Winkler (Grey-Bruce):: Mr. Speaker, we are pleased to hear the statement of the minister as it applies to the people concerned. We were surprised, of course, by the announcement that was made by the Postmaster General in Vancouver some time prior to this statement this morning, as reported by the Canadian Press in yesterday's Ottawa Citizen. The statement made by the Postmaster General in Vancouver is reported in this dispatch in part as follows:
This means that even "ship-jumping sailors or those who came in with forged passports or other means" will be granted amnesty if they step forward and declare their status-
I am wondering whether this will apply to other nationalities, particularly in the case of people who have made application for Canadian citizenship and who are in the country on non-permanent visas, against whom orders to return to their native lands have been registered. Will this include that group of people, or how far is this going to extend?


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: Mr. Speaker, I merely wish to commend the minister for the statement he has made with regard to the amnesty being extended beyond September 1. I agree with the minister, and I think the proposal he has outlined is the most satisfactory way to handle the situation. I should like to express the hope, however, that when the minister decides to terminate this arrangement and set a deadline there will be at least a month or six weeks' notice given so we will not have a rush at the last minute, or people claiming they were not informed of the fact that there was a cut-off date. Perhaps if notice were given 30 days ahead of the actual deadline it would be most helpful.


Hon. J. R. Nicholson (Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, in reply to the point just raised I should like to say that in fact there was no announcement or statement made by the Postmaster General in Vancouver. Since I was going to be in Vancouver for our summer vacation over the Labour day week end, and having received a number of telephone calls, telegrams and inquiries as to the significance of the statement made by my colleague the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration on


August 19, I agreed to meet while in Vancouver with representatives of the Chinese Canadian community and more particularly with the Chinese language press on Saturday afternoon of last week to answer any questions they might wish to put to me arising out of the minister's statement of August 19. This I did, and the question about ship jumpers came up during the discussion.

On the orders of the day:


Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (Queens-Lunenburg):: Mr. Speaker, I have a further question for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. I am sure all of us were interested in his statement this morning regarding the granting of a general amnesty to the Chinese. The hon. member for Grey-Bruce posed a direct question to the minister with regard to those of other nationalities who may be in this country under similar circumstances, and the minister has not answered that question. Will a general amnesty be granted to other nationals who are in this country under the same conditions as the Chinese?


René Tremblay: Mr. Speaker, I would point out that the decision of the government was not to extend the amnesty period, since this tolerance policy had been established under the previous government. This amnesty period only applied to people who came to Canada prior to 1960. In any case, the extension of this amnesty period or tolerance, as it is called, had been decided upon by successive ministers under the former government, including Mr. Bell, and was continued under the present Liberal government by Hon. Mr. Favreau and myself, and September 1, 1964, marked the end of that tolerance period. Consequently, this government did not take any step or decision to extend the amnesty period in the case of Chinese, since the amnesty was already in existence prior to 1960 and, in any case, a tolerance existed under the former government as well as under this government. This period of amnesty ended on September 1, 1964.
To give a more direct answer to the hon. member, I will say that the government has no intention to extend to other groups in Canada the policy applied to the Chinese under the former government.


Mr. Barry Mather (New Westminster):: have a question for the Minister of Citizen-

ship and Immigration which is related somewhat to the questions asked of him earlier. I wonder if his attention has been called to a decision of the United Church of Canada yesterday to request a basic review of Canada's immigration policy. If so, will he say whether he will consider acceding to that request?


René Tremblay: No, Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of that suggestion. I will study it and will then be in a position to give my views to the hon. member.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS CONTINUATION OF PRESENT PROVISIONS RESPECTING SHARED PROGRAMS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Prime Minister a question about the letter to the provinces he tabled yesterday with regard to opting out of federal-provincial programs. I am not so much concerned about the smaller programs, but I am concerned about major programs such as hospital insurance, old age assistance, blind persons allowances and disabled persons allowances. I should like to ask the Prime Minister a question with regard to these words in his letter to the prime minister of Quebec, as found on page 7875 of Hansard:
...and on the understanding that all the other conditions of the programs would be maintained during the interim period.
Does this mean the house can be assured that the reciprocity provision will be continued and that uniformity with respect to eligibility will be continued in all these programs?


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, that is my understanding, but this is a very important matter and I should like to look into it and confirm that understanding Monday.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will there definitely be legislation to deal with this matter this fall; and can the Prime Minister also tell the house later, if not now, what is the total amount of money involved in these transfers and in this opting out provision?


Lester Bowles Pearson: With respect to the first question, we hope there will be legislation dealing with this matter this autumn. In reply to the second part of the question, I
Inquiries of the Ministry do not have the figure here but I will be glad to get it.



MOOSE JAW, SASK.  OPERATION OF GRAIN DRYING FACILITIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. E. Pascoe (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture, who has jurisdiction over the board of grain commissioners. Wheat board quotations indicate a big price spread between dry and tough and damp grain. There will be a large amount of tough and damp grain in the west because of rain and snow on the prairies, also resulting from the new limitations on grain moisture content.
There is a large government elevator at Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, with modern equipment for drying grain. Will the minister take steps to arrange for the operation of the elevator's grain drying facilities at full capacity so the tough and damp grain can be put into condition for marketing or storing?


Hon. Harry W. Hays (Minister of Agriculture):: I will be pleased to bring the hon. member's request to the attention of the board of grain commissioners.



INQUIRY AS TO DELIVERY QUOTAS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day;
Mr. Lawrence Watson (Assiniboia):: I have
a question for the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Can the hon. gentleman tell the house the reason for the delay in having all delivery points in western Canada placed on an initial 1 bushel quota, and can he inform us when the Canadian wheat board expects to have all points in western Canada on a 1 bushel quota or better?


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: The wheat board is already moving ahead rapidly in the opening up of quotas. I am not in a position to say when a 1 bushel quota will be established everywhere, but I have been in touch with the board-indeed, a member of the board is here today-and I will be discussing the suggestion made by the hon. member.


Lawrence E. Watson: Will the minister inform the house, after he has talked with officials of the board, when it is expected that a 1 bushel quota will be established?


Mitchell William Sharp: I will try to make a statement as soon as possible after I have some information to provide to the house.
7880	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry
INDUSTRY	nance intend to grant that firm the same
number of information officers to be tariff concessions that were granted to the engaged by department	Volvo firm when it settled in Halifax?
On the orders of the day:


Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington South):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Industry. Would the minister care to confirm or deny that his department has hired or will be hiring 35 information officers, thereby establishing a ratio of one information officer to 18 officials?


Hon. C. M. Drury (Minister of Industry):: I can deny that the Department of Industry will be hiring 35 information officers. There is no such establishment provided, planned or approved.


Alfred Dryden Hales: May I ask a supplementary question. How many information officers does the department propose to hire?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I have not got the exact figures before me this morning. I will be glad to make a statement on this on Monday.


Mr. Donald Maclnnis (Cape Breton South):: May I ask a supplementary question of the Minister of Industry. I understood the minister to say in reply to the first question that there was no establishment for information officers. Then in reply to the supplementary question he said he would be glad to make a statement on this subject. I should like the minister to clear up this point. If there is no establishment how can he make a statement on the subject?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I am sorry if I did not make myself clear. I said there was no establishment for 35 information officers.



DISCUSSIONS RESPECTING ESTABLISH- MENT OF AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Marcel Lessard (Lake St. John):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Industry?
The director of Quebec's General Investment Corporation, Mr. Gerard Filion, who is now in Paris to arrange for the Peugeot firm to settle here soon, has stated that such a probable and possible move is hindered by the tariff concessions granted to that firm on parts it would have to import into Canada to assemble automobiles.
Is the minister in a position to tell us if his department or the Department of Fi-


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I can confirm that the government is willing to grant the company represented by Mr. Filion tariff concessions equivalent to those granted the Volvo company.


Marcel Lessard: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.
Could the minister say whether other automobile manufacturers who are against the coming of that French company to Canada and to Quebec especially have brought pressure to bear? Have Chrysler, Ford or General Motors objected to the granting of tariff concessions to that company?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I must explain that the proposed concessions will be of a temporary nature only. Consequently, Chrysler, Ford and General Motors would not be justified in asking for the same concessions since they have been in Canada for a long time.



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. W. Baldwin (Peace River):: I have a question for the Acting Minister of Finance based on a report as to the present revenue position of the government. Can the minister indicate whether current figures suggest that the Minister of Finance, in his last budget, miscalculated the revenue that would be received by the government?


Mitchell William Sharp: I have read the articles referred to by the hon. member. I know the house will be happy to learn that the Minister of Finance has miscalculated the revenues, because the country is even more prosperous than he had expected at the time the budget was brought down.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: You inherited a very good economy.


Mitchell William Sharp: May I add, however, that the degree of improvement in the revenue position which is suggested in the articles, particularly the one in the Financial Post, is much exaggerated.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. William Dean Howe (Hamilton South):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to redirect a question to the Associate Minister of National Defence. Is the minister now in a position to answer the question I asked yesterday regarding the actions of the R.C.A.F. police at La Macaza?


Hon. Lucien Cardin (Associate Minister of National Defence):: Yes, Mr. Speaker, and I want to thank the hon. member for having sent me a copy of the newspaper article on which he apparently based his question.
I have had an opportunity to get a report on the allegations contained in the news article, and I can inform the hon. member that the allegations are false. The demonstrators attempted to block the main entrance to R.C.A.F. station La Macaza and, in order to allow vehicles to enter the station, some of these demonstrators, having refused to permit free passage of the vehicles, were removed by R.C.A.F. personnel, with a minimum of force, to the side of the road. I understand the R.C.A.F. personnel involved showed great patience and restraint in carrying out their duty, and under the circumstances I do not feel that an apology is necessary.



REQUEST FOR STATEMENT ON REORGANIZATION OF MILITIA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
['Nothing would give me greater pleasure, but I doubt whether the timetable for next Wednesday would permit it. We would only be in or over British Columbia for a very few hours. Incidentally, I should like to extend a very warm invitation to the hon. gentleman to be with us on this occasion.']
Hon. Gordon Churchill (Winnipeg South Centre):: I should like to ask the Associate Minister of National Defence whether he is prepared to make a statement to the house concerning the proposed reorganization of the Canadian militia. Will the minister indicate to the house what units of the Canadian militia are to be discontinued?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: It was made clear, Mr. Speaker, both to the house and to the committee, that the department is now studying the reorganization of the militia and that early in October a full statement will be made on that subject.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, as a supplementary question could I ask the Associate Minister of National Defence to inform the house whether the Winnipeg Rifles will be continued in the militia, or will it be one of the battalions which are to be disbanded?
Inquiries of the Ministry


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Speaker, I do not think I should start going over the list of the militia units which are to be retained and those which are to be withdrawn. I think the best thing to do is to wait until I can make a complete statement on this matter in October.



[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. A. Olson (Medicine Hat):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Yesterday the United States department of agriculture announced it will be sending a team of technicians to India to assist in stepping up what they call their food for peace program, to reach delivery of 600,000 tons per month to that country. In view of the fact that on several occasions the minister has announced that Canada intends to increase her foreign aid contribution to something like $40 million a year, is he prepared to make an announcement soon since there is obviously an urgent need for increased food shipments to that part of the world?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, the government has already announced a very substantial increase in shipments of food under our aid program. I think this announcement was made either by the Secretary of State for External Affairs or myself, or by both of us. We have been in touch with the Indian authorities, and we have made it quite clear that if, for example, some additional shipments of grain from Canada would be helpful in this emergency we would be happy to supply them.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: As a supplementary question, if any assistance is given to India would this be in addition to the commitments we have already made under the Colombo plan?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Shipments under the Colombo plan are now proceeding, and what we are talking about is additional shipments if the government of India requests them. I did not want to suggest in anything I said that India would necessarily ask for it. To date the Indian government has made no request. But we are in touch to make sure that if there is any way in which we can be helpful we stand ready to be helpful.
7882	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: wish to address a question to the Prime Minister, based on a telegram I have just received. I will read the telegram before asking the question.
Since the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of the United States will be viewing the Columbia river basin by air on Wednesday next and since Castlegar has an airport within three miles of the high Arrow which has been the most controversial of these sites, we the council of the village of Castlegar would be pleased through you to extend to them an invitation to land here and view the dam site at first hand and we would be honoured and pleased to make all arrangements.
My question is, will the Prime Minister accept this invitation and opportunity to meet some of the residents of the Arrow lakes on this occasion?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Nothing would give me greater pleasure, but I doubt whether the timetable for next Wednesday would permit it. We would only be in or over British Columbia for a very few hours. Incidentally, I should like to extend a very warm invitation to the hon. gentleman to be with us on this occasion.



MALAYSIA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Minto Churchill: I should like to ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs, who I am sure does not wish to be neglected during the question period, whether he has an answer to my question of yesterday concerning the aid being given to Malaysia by other commonwealth countries.
Mon. Paul Martin (Secretary of State for External Affairs): I am sure that in asking this question the hon. gentleman was moved only by altruistic motives, and I greatly appreciate this. I have looked at the response I made, and I think it is a complete answer. However, when the commission from Malaysia now touring the United States comes here there may be something further to add.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The minister has not yet answered a question I have now asked for the third time. What aid is being given to Malaysia by commonwealth countries other than Canada? Must I rely for information on articles appearing in the Globe and Mail


or in the London Times, on which the hon. gentleman cast some doubt the other day? Could we not have an authoritative statement from him?


Mr. Martin (Essex East):: I do not think the hon. gentleman need rely on anything other than the reply I gave him, a reply which I think should stand.



NEW BRUNSWICK


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Robert C. Coates (Cumberland):: Last Friday I addressed a question to the Prime Minister with regard to a $20 million grant to be made available to the government of New Brunswick for the development of the Mactaquac power project on the Saint John river. I wonder whether the right hon. gentleman is now in a position to answer that question.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I am afraid I am not. I mentioned this matter to my hon. friend the Minister of Transport, who I understand was to make a reply, but he is not in his place today. I will try to deal with this on Monday.



PHARMACEUTICAL ASSOCIATION REPRESENTATION ON BODIES CONSIDERING PROFESSIONAL MATTERS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lester Bowles Pearson: May I take this opportunity to reply to a question asked on Tuesday by the hon. member for Moose Mountain concerning consultation between the Canadian pharmaceutical association and the government. Such consultation will be particularly useful in connection with the consideration of the report of the royal commission on health services, which is presently being studied. In this connection the government has already received an assurance of co-operation from a number of professional associations, including the one referred to. The government will, of course, consult fully with these agencies, and desires to consult fully with them on matters of concern to their members. It is anticipated that this consultation will be on a continuing and periodic basis, but the administrative pattern for such consultation has not yet been finally determined.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Alfred Dryden Hales: should like to direct a question to the Postmaster General, who answers in the house with respect to the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Will direct loans on speculative housing be made available through the corporation this fall? If they will not, the winter incentive home building program will not be assisted very much.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: I am glad to be able to inform the hon. member and other members of the house that in connection with the winter incentive housing program, arrangements will be made similar to those made last year, for substantially the same period of time, with regard to speculative loans.



EDUCATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. In his absence I would direct it either to the acting minister or to the parliamentary secretary. Is the government aware of the fact that within the province of Manitoba the forms being provided for students wishing to apply for loans under the federal government's student loan plan are those previously used by the Manitoba government itself? And is the hon. gentleman aware that these forms call for information not provided for in the government's own legislation, for example an affidavit by parents stating their financial position, and so on? I wonder whether this matter could be looked into over the week end in the hope that if something is being done which is not in accord with the understanding which was reached, it may be corrected.


Mr. L. T. Pennell (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance):: I will be glad to take the question as notice and bring it to the attention of the minister, who will be returning shortly.


Mr. Reid Scott (Danforth):: In view of a report in the Toronto Daily Star last night that the student loan program, at least in
Inquiries of the Ministry Ontario, is bogged down by red tape, I wonder whether the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Finance would look into this situation, too, over the week end so these roadblocks, if they do exist, can be cleared out of the way.


Lawrence T. Pennell: I will be pleased to accept the suggestion of the hon. member and to bring this matter also to the attention of the minister.



INCREASED ASSISTANCE TO UNIVERSITY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: have a question for the Prime Minister. Having regard to the extreme crowding of university facilities due to the current soaring enrolment figures, can the right hon. gentleman inform the house when the increased assistance to university construction programs announced during his speech on the Brandon College campus on March 7, 1963 will be implemented?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker. As soon as I am able to say something on this important matter I will be glad to do so, but I cannot be specific at the moment.



DEFENCE PRODUCTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the minister in charge of defence production or the Associate Minister of National Defence if either of them has received protests from the Halifax-Dartmouth and district labour council regarding the fact that H.M.C.S. Provider is not going to be repaired in the Halifax docks, and what action is being taken with regard to these protests?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I did receive such a telegram. While the repairs to Provider had been sought by competitive tenders, the tender of the Halifax shipyard was somewhat higher than that of the Saint John dockyard, and as a consequence the contract has been awarded to the Saint John Drydock Company rather than to Halifax. I should point out that in the telegram, of which I think the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam has a copy, it is stated that the only
7884	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry difference between the two tenders was the sum of $150. In fact this is not quite precise; in addition to the $150 difference there was a further qualification contained in the Halifax shipyard bid which put it out of court.



MAINTENANCE AND CONVERSION OP SHIPS ON PACIFIC COAST

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday last the hon. member for Esquimalt-Saanich asked whether the government would continue the policy that ships operating on the Pacific coast would be maintained and converted there. There is currently a review being made of government needs for the acquisition and conversion of shipping of all sorts, but in the meantime it is safe to say that ships which are based on one or other of the coasts and which will continue to operate on the same coast will be maintained on the coast on which they are based and on which they will continue to operate.



AIRPORTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
William Dean Howe: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Transport but in his absence perhaps the Prime Minister could answer it. Yesterday officials from the Hamilton city council were in Ottawa to meet with the officials of the Department of Transport with regard to Mount Hope airport. Could the minister tell the house what was the outcome of the discussions which were held?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I wish I could answer that question, but I am not in a position to do so. I will try to get an answer for Monday.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Reid Scott: Mr. Speaker,
I have a question for the Prime Minister. In view of the result in the Toronto Riverdale election yesterday, which removed one of the candidates for the leadership of the Ontario Liberal party from the race, could the Prime Minister confirm or deny the very prevalent rumour in Ontario that he has given his official blessing to the hon. member for Renfrew South?



INQUIRY AS TO HOLIDAYS FOR STAFF

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the President of the Privy Council. In view of the fact that there seems to be general agreement that with the amount of business before us the house must carry on, is it not possible for a quick decision to be made so that members of the House of Commons staff might get their holidays? By "a quick decision" I mean letting some of them, on a staggered basis, start getting holidays this very week end.


Hon. G. J. Mcllrailh (President of the Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, this question is getting active consideration. Many members of the staff of the House of Commons are presently on holiday. The problem has to be worked out, bearing in mind that if the house is sitting certain services are required, but I can assure the hon. member that the subject is getting very active consideration.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Did I hear the President of the Privy Council say that some of the sessional staff, or those who are regarded as sessional staff, of the House of Commons are presently on holidays?


George James McIlraith: No, Mr. Speaker, I did not use the word "sessional".



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Raymond Langlois (Meganlic):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Justice. Is it a fact that Mr. Hal Banks is now in London to see the Canadian high commissioner, Mr. Chevrier, a former minister of justice of this country?



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Joseph Slogan (Springfield):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Postmaster General. I wonder whether the Postmaster General could explain to the house the symbolism in the new stamp which is being issued by his department commemorating the 1864 meetings, and specifically could

he explain the fact that the three maple leaves on an earlier stamp have been replaced by one maple leaf?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, they have not been replaced. Consequently I am afraid I do not understand the hon. gentleman's question.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Guy Marcoux (Quebec-Montmorency):: Mr. Speaker, my question was meant for the Minister of Labour but, in his absence, I shall put it to his parliamentary secretary.
It has to do with the statement the minister made last Friday in regard to the extension of certain winter works periods. Could the parliamentary secretary ask the minister to give us a more specific statement a little later on, so we may know exactly what conditions are to be met and whether it will be up to the provinces or the federal government to decide whether there will be such extensions?


Mr. J. A. Byrne (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Labour):: I would be delighted to do so, Mr. Speaker.

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



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE

[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration, $2,099,000.
Joseph Slogan: Mr. Chairman, at the adjournment yesterday I was making some remarks regarding the dental health of Canadians. I think it is significant that about one quarter of the 200 or so recommendations in the Hall report deal with the dental health of Canadians. I think this again points up the importance of the subject. I had pointed out that dental diseases are almost universal, but at the same time they are largely preventable. However, because of the apathy of the public and the complacency of governments we are a nation of dental cripples. I could quote examples of the incidence of dental diseases among children but I hardly think I need do so. The tragedy of the situation is that those preventive measures which could be undertaken
Supply-Health and Welfare by the government at a very nominal cost are not being undertaken. Therefore a great deal of responsibility for the situation must rest on the shoulders of the government.
I must congratulate the minister on answering one of my questions, after many futile attempts, concerning fluoridation; but although the government was willing to put the facts before the people it has consistently refused to recommend this measure to the people, even though the Hall royal commission has recommended that in view of the reduction in dental disease to be expected from the fluoridation program, every community water system in Canada be equipped to provide the proper level of fluoride.
At the last meeting of the Canadian Dental Association a resolution was adopted recommending fluoridation to the people of Canada. The report released at the time of the meeting showed that 92 per cent more Canadians were using fluoridated water in 1963 than in 1962, a total of almost four million, or one in five. I think this number should be substantially increased, and there are three areas in which a great deal could be done. One area, of course, is research, and I dealt with that yesterday to a large extent and showed that the amount of money allocated to dental research in national health grants is approximately 1 per cent to 2 per cent and has been steadily declining over the last three years.
A program to educate the public in this field should also be considered, and, I must congratulate the toothpaste companies for their television advertisements, because they are bringing to the attention of the people the need for oral hygiene; and through improved oral hygiene alone the number of dental cavities can be cut in half. The government should assure responsibility in this regard. The department is putting out some pamphlets which I think are very good, but there should be more of them and they should be more widely distributed.
There is another subject I should like to touch upon, and that is prepaid dental plans. The dental associations across this country are studying the feasibility of prepaid dental health insurance, and are doing this largely on their own. It should be incumbent upon this government to allocate funds for studies in respect of the feasibility of dental health insurance, in so far as it differs from medical health insurance and insurance principles.
There are a number of questions I should like to ask the minister and I hope she will provide us with some answers, particularly in respect to questions and recommendations

Supply-Health and Welfare about the administration within her own department. First of all I should like to ask again whether any step is being taken by the department to establish a specific dental health grant under the system of national health grants. When these grants were initially made I know that in the province of Manitoba they had to be taken from the maternal health plan. That was some time ago, but as time has passed every segment receiving these grants has been taxed to the full, and the segments which are receiving the grants are no longer willing to give some of this money to the dental field. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that a specific dental health grant be made. The minister has received specific representations from the Canadian Dental Association in respect of this matter, and I should like her to give an answer before we pass her first item, outlining her plans in this regard.
Another matter which I should like to draw to her attention relates to the various dental branches in other departments of the government, such as the Department of Veterans Affairs, which looks after the dental health of the R.C.M.P. and veterans; the Department of Justice, which looks after the dental health of inmates in penitentiaries, and the northern health services dental branch. It is time all dental services within the government, other than military, should be consolidated under one dental head.
I think that would bring about something that is very badly needed, and I refer to a uniform fee schedule. Each department has a different set of forms to be filled out and a different fee schedule, and many of the forms are extremely complicated. Everytime an R.C.M.P. officer goes to his dentist, the dentist has to fill out a long form listing all the dental work that has ever been done on that officer's teeth. If that officer comes in every six months and only has one or two fillings, this necessitates a great deal of work and a waste of time. Those are some of the things I think the department should look into in an attempt to simplify the procedures and eliminate some of the red tape that imposes such a burden on the practitioner.
I should like to make another recommendation to the minister concerning her department which is in keeping with a recommendation made by the Canadian Dental Association to the Hall commission, that steps be taken to see that the remuneration of professional people in government service is equivalent to that which they would receive in the private sector of the economy.

Unless this is done it is hardly possible that we will fill the quotas we have for professional people in government, and certainly the conditions will not attract the best people but more likely the worst.
I think the people of Canada deserve something better. I think those individuals who undertake to dedicate themselves to public health in Canada, and accept government jobs, deserve better remuneration. At the same time I should like to recommend that members of the dental and medical professions should receive the same remuneration, because I see no reason why the dental field should be a step down the ladder.
Mr. Chairman, I suggest the minister should give autonomy to the dental branch so that in the final analysis decisions regarding dentistry will come from the dental division and not have to go through a medical man. Perhaps the lack of autonomy in that field is the reason dentistry has been allocated such a low position in government service.
As I have already said, I should like to know what thought the minister has given to allocating money for the establishment of pilot projects in respect of prepaid dental plans rather than the profession assuming the whole responsibility. The Hall commission report contains almost 50 recommendations in respect of what governments can do in the field of dental health, and in order to facilitate the passage of the minister's estimates I should like some information about what the government is doing in the way of grants for dental education, the establishment of new dental schools and other similar things. Perhaps it is of interest to note that Canada is fourteenth among 19 nations of the world as far as our population-dentist ratio is concerned. The government does have some responsibility in this regard.
Before concluding it might be of interest to hon. members to know that in 1926 the percentage of the consumer health dollar that was allocated to dental services was 11.7 per cent; 1929 it was 12.1 per cent; in 1934 it was 8.7 per cent; in 1945 it was 10.9 per cent and in 1961 it was 7.4 per cent. Relative to the total spent on health services the amount of money that is being spent on dentistry by the people of Canada today is lower than it has been for a great number of years. It might also be of interest to know -and this is one of the brighter sides-that although the ratio of dentists to population is expected to improve slightly over the next ten years and then become worse again, if

we take the output productivity of dentists in 1931 as 100 per cent, in 1961 it had reached 281 per cent. At the same time the productivity of physicians and priests reached 175 per cent. Although because of increased technical knowledge and improved facilities in dental offices the productivity is increasing, it is not increasing fast enough to meet the growing needs of Canadians.
I have asked the minister several specific questions, and I am willing to sit down at this time in the hope that some answers will be provided before the first item is passed so I will not have to ask these questions again as the individual items are reached.


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to take too much of the committee's time, but there is a matter which I should like to place before the minister. It is probably not one which requires immediate attention, but I think it might well be given some consideration leading, I hope, to appropriate action at some time in the future.
May I at this time congratulate the minister on the reasonableness of her presentation. As a member of the legal profession and a very competent counsel, I understand, she has probably learned in the past the distinction between browbeating a witness- although, mind you, sometimes this may be necessary-and persuading, influencing and beguiling a jury. If she and her colleagues continue to regard the opposition as a jury I think we will make better progress.
I have here a press release issued in July by the world health organization dealing with what I consider to be one of the most serious problems to be faced not only by the civilized and free areas of the world but by the communist areas and the developing regions of the globe. I think it is rather interesting to examine the personnel who constituted this committee of the world health organization. It was headed by Dr. John A. Logan of the United States. The vice chairman was a woman, Dr. A. S. Perotskaja of the U.S.S.R. The rapporteur was Mr. P. C. Bose of India. The committee also included one representative each from Chile, the Netherlands, France, the United Kingdom and Tunisia. The release is titled "The Population Implosion". The head note is very simple and reads as follows:
The sudden unprecedented pouring of rural people into urban areas in the developing countries may-reach catastrophic dimensions within the next 10 or 20 years. In the developed countries, the congestion of people, industries, houses, vehicles in tentacular cities is causing alarm. The implosive
Supply-Health and Welfare
pressures-to use an engineering term-are growing every day.
To explore these questions the world health organization recently convened its first expert committee on environmental health aspects of metropolitan planning. This article follows the lines of the experts' discussions-
I am going to put a few of their observations on the record. These are not colourful, glowing, dramatic words. They are dry, even dreary, but they are very meaningful and most important. While I have no doubt much of this material is within the knowledge of the minister and her department, at the same time I think it does no harm to make this information public and to couple with it a suggestion I propose to make at the conclusion of my remarks.
To begin with, the release repeats a fact we well know but too often forget. It points out that before the year 2,000 the world's population is expected to double and to exceed six billion people. Then it goes on to say:
The rush of people from country to town will continue, for agriculture will become much more efficient than it is now and by the end of the century perhaps only 10 per cent of the population will be working on the farm.
This means that almost all of the additional three billion people who will be populating the globe by that time will be living in cities. This will cause problems, and not the least of them will be health problems.
Already today the cities of the world present health problems of staggering dimensions. How healthy will they be in future? The tremendous increase in urban population clearly justifies the warning that after the question of keeping world peace metropolitan planning is probably the most serious single problem faced by man in the second half of the 20th century.
If the population of the world does double and if what is set out here is correct-I certainly agree with it-we will find that instead of the population of cities of say two million doubling to four million, their population will triple or quadruple. Cities of six million people will become cities of 24 million. Cities with one and a half or two million people will become cities of seven or eight million people. The problems we now have will increase in direct ratio to the increase in population.
In the United States two thirds of the population now live in large metropolitan areas and the suburbs of the cities are sprawling six times as fast as the city cores. In the developed parts of the world the housing shortage is not as great as it was immediately after the war but none of the countries can afford to relinquish their intensive efforts. In the developing parts of the world shanty

Supply-Health and Welfare towns, bidonvilles, slums, squatter settlements are mushrooming. In the built areas overcrowding is acute.
The release goes on to say:
Urbanization has two sides: opportunities for higher standards of living, for better education and housing, for more public health and more social satisfactions; on the negative side, however, there is encroachment on the available land, water and air, and amid multiple threats to health there is the general degradation of man's physical and social environment. The downward trend is easily recognized: overcrowding; building congestion; proliferation of slums; water shortage; inadequate waste disposal; pollution of water, land, air; noise, accidents, delinquency, crime, disease.
These are compendious words but these are all matters in respect of which legislative action is going to have to be taken at the municipal, provincial and federal levels, and I think it does no harm to draw these issues to the attention of the committee at this time.
Here, for example, are some very simple figures indicating what the increase in population will mean. For every new 1,000 people in a United States metropolitan area the following additional facilities are needed: 4.8 elementary school rooms and 3.6 high school rooms; 8.8 acres of land for schools, parks and play areas; an additional 100,000 gallons of water per day; 1.8 new policemen and 1.5 new firemen; one new hospital bed- this is something which certainly must concern the future planning of the Department of National Health and Welfare-1,000 new library books and a fraction of a jail cell, as well as more streets, more surfaces for the municipality to keep clean, more solid wastes to clear away, more sewage to treat, more storm water to cope with and so on.
One of the most interesting suggestions contained in the press release has to do with air pollution. We have heard a lot about water pollution and about the open sewers which our rivers are becoming. I now quote from the press release:
The simplest and most dramatic effect of air pollution is the increased number of deaths during periods of smog or other serious pollution. Mortality is greatest among the old and the infirm. But there is no doubt that air pollution plays a part in respiratory and other diseases.
According to the W.H.O. experts on metropolitan planning, one of the main causes of "unbalance" of the modem metropolis is without doubt the motor car.
We are all familiar with the condition brought about by motor car fumes in the city of Los Angeles. We hope it will not spread to our country, but the way to see that it does not is to plan well in advance.

Some suggestions are made with regard to steps to be taken to combat air pollution:
Satellite towns in which no pollution-producing fuels are used; green belts and wide open spaces to dilute and disperse pollution; central plants to provide heat and hot water to whole districts; less traffic flow in metropolitan areas; appropriate devices for automobile engines to minimize pollution.
In the Soviet union some attention has been given to this problem, and it is very interesting to note this comment in the press release:
In the Soviet union, standards in this matter have been adopted for new urban development. All industrial undertakings are divided into five classes according to the harmful substances discharged. For the "most harmful" class, factories must be separated from residential areas by a protective zone of greenery ranging from 1,000 to 3,000 metres depending on local weather conditions, etc. For the class at the other end of the scale, the figures are 50 to 150 metres.
There is this very interesting comment, and it is a statement which has been applied and accepted with regard to water:
Air should be regarded as a world resource to be conserved and utilized forever. The laissez faire policy of treating the sky as an open sewer is doomed to lead to disaster.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I am not going to take the time to go into this press release any further. I am advised by the officials of the world health organization that a statement will be made available in due course and will be in our parliamentary library.
My experience has been that the period of gestation which leads to reforms and measures to combat problems of this magnitude is very lengthy. It may be 10, 15 or 20 years, but the gathering storm which is going to break upon the world in the form of the increase in population is something which must be dealt with at the legislative level as well as at the planning level. As I say, I assume and I hope this is a matter which the officials of the minister's department do take into consideration.
I make this simple suggestion now, and it is not one I expect to be implemented at this or even the next session. The minister should give consideration to discussing the prospect of establishing a joint committee of the Senate and House of Commons to deal with the problems of overcrowding, particularly as they relate to the varied and multiple matters over which she presides as minister of this department. A committee of this kind would, I assume, not conclude its deliberations in any great hurry. I would think that a period of years, perhaps two or three, might well elapse before the committee could report. I am sure the publicity achieved as a result of making an inquiry through a

parliamentary committee of this kind would be a noticeable advantage that could not be derived in any other way.
I am going to conclude by urging the minister to make a note of this, if she has not already done so, as well as of the statement which will be made available in due course by the world health organization committee which deals with this very serious problem. It is one which will inevitably come upon us. It is my honest opinion that the establishment of an all-party joint committee to look into the problems with which we will be dealing in the near future is something which would be of major benefit to this country, and which would lend distinction to her administration of this department.


Mr. Cowan:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to take this opportunity to comment on the nursing situation in the hospitals of this country, in view of the fact that we are dealing with item No. 1 of the Department of National Health and Welfare. I make particular reference to the item on page 286 of the estimates, contribution to the provinces under agreements entered into pursuant to the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act, $420 million. I have no criticism whatever to make of the amount of money involved in this item; in fact I am happy to see that the increase over a year ago is $35 million.
Last night the hon. member for Kamloops very definitely and explicitly put his finger on a great problem in this country of ours; that is, the continuing shortage of doctors. He emphasized that steps must be taken to meet this situation, which is becoming dangerous for the country as a whole. He also, out of his vast knowledge of the subject, dealt with the lack of money for medical research. The hon. member for Springfield was kind enough to speak on some of the problems connected with dentistry. I should like to refer to the nursing situation, which I believe is of more serious import to this nation than the shortage of doctors or the shortage of funds for medical research. However, I wish to congratulate the government upon the fact that this government has implemented the system of shift differential rates of pay for nurses in hospitals under the Department of Veterans Affairs.
This action by the Department of Veterans Affairs means that in every such hospital in the country the federal government is now paying a shift differential to the staff, including nurses. The nurses who work the evening shift are paid more money than those who work the day shift, and those
Supply-Health and Welfare who work the night shift are paid more money than those who work the evening shift. This government, and particularly the Minister of National Health and Welfare, are to be congratulated upon the fact that they have willingly paid, as did the previous administration under the hon. member for Perth, their share of the shift differentials to all hospital employees in the provinces of Quebec and Saskatchewan, and to all hospital employees except nurses in the province of British Columbia.
Now, I should like the hospital staffs of the dominion to realize that the federal government, under both the previous administration and this administration, has shown by its actions that it is not averse to paying shift differentials in all hospitals of the dominion. The federal government is paying approximately one third of the cost of the operation of all hospitals in the nation, and that is a very healthy contribution. I admire the present Secretary of State for External Affairs for many, many things. I first met him in 1922, and I have had a close and intimate contact with him over the intervening 42 years. I sincerely believe that the most outstanding act in his life was the introduction of this hospitalization act on a national basis. I am not suggesting that the Liberal government of 1956 initiated this type of welfare service. I know that two provinces in western Canada had experimented with it and had shown it could be done. However, the present Secretary of State for External Affairs is the man who made it possible to extend this type of hospital care from one end of the country to the other with the first act in 1956.
When the hospital staffs of the nation realize that the federal government, both the previous administration and this administration, is willingly paying one third of the cost of shift differentials, I feel that the staffs of those hospitals in the seven provinces not now paying shift differentials will demand that the provincial authorities institute shift differentials for these employees. I spoke on this subject two years ago when I was in opposition and we were considering the estimates of this department. I spoke on the subject a year ago, and I would go into it in detail once more except that I should like to see the estimates of the government passed as speedily as possible.
I did emphasize on both occasions when I spoke on this matter that I was advocating not only the payment of shift differentials for hospital staffs, but the payment of

Supply-Health and Welfare
day premium rates of pay for those who are forced to work on Saturdays, Sundays, or statutory holidays. I produced many figures to show that the payment of day premium rates of pay is in practical operation in the printing trades in Canada, the one business about which I know most. If they can pay day premium rates for working Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, surely the governments of the ten provinces and the dominion can do the same thing.
I hold in my hand a contract between the Canadian union of operating engineers and one of the Toronto hospitals. This contract is up for renegotiation, as it expires next month, but the interesting thing about this contract is that it provides for day premium rates of pay to the engineer staff for holiday work. The particular clause dealing with it reads this way:
Paid Holidays
The following holidays are recognized by the employer: New Year's day, Dominion day, Thanksgiving day. Good Friday, Civic holiday, Christmas day, Victoria day, Labour day.
All employees in this bargaining unit shall be given the above holidays off, with pay at their normal rates. However, should they be required to work on one of the above holidays, they shall be paid a day's pay plus time and one half their normal rate of pay.
I read this one contract between a labour union and a Canadian hospital simply as an example of what prevails in a fair number of hospitals today, that is, a day premium rate of pay for holidays; and the federal government is paying one third of that cost. Of course I believe that when the federal government is willing to pay one third of the cost of the day premium rates of pay for holidays, Sundays and Saturdays, it should pay a day premium rate to employees under its direct control and paid directly by cheques of the government of Canada.
In connection with this contract I have in my hand it is interesting to note that since the engineers are now paid a day premium rate of pay for national holidays, one of the items on which they wish to negotiate is a change in article 10:
All hours worked on Saturday or Sunday shall be paid at the rate of time and one half.
I am not in a position to state whether this request of the union of operating engineers will be granted by the employing hospital whose contract I hold in my hand at this time, but it is going to be difficult to tell employees of the hospital that they should not be paid time and one half for Saturday and Sunday work when you are already

paying them at two and a half times the rate of pay for statutory holidays.
The reason I emphasize day premium rates of pay so seriously is because I believe if they were being paid in all hospitals of the country at the present time we would be able to attract into the nursing stream a tremendous number of married women who are qualified nurses, but who will not leave their homes on week ends for the present rates of pay. It is pretty universal across the country that nurses working on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays draw only the regular rates of pay that people get for working on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday or any other day of the week.
While many of these rates of pay today are almost munificent, it is a different matter when you ask a married woman to desert her home on the week end, perhaps for the only three days of the week her husband is there, and when the children are home from school and require a little more attention than when they are at classes. In that case, when a married woman thinks of the regular rate of pay for Saturdays and Sundays she is going to weigh it against the disadvantage of leaving her home. But if married nurses were paid a day premium rate of pay on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays I am certain there would be a great influx of married nurses back to the hospitals.
I have emphasized in the two previous comments I made on this situation-and I wish to say there was not a doctor in the house on either side of the aisle who did not come to me and say I was putting my finger on a matter of paramount importance to the nation-that if we paid day premium rates of pay over week ends and national holidays, I am confident we could increase the care rendered by the hospitals by 25 per cent, and we would not have to lay out any extra capital money in grants.
I stress the figure of 25 per cent on this basis, that many, many hospitals practically close on Friday at noon and do not get back into full operation until Monday morning. Doctors, particularly surgeons, do not want to operate over week ends when they know the staff is going to be considerably reduced. As I said before, and I repeat, somebody will immediately rise and point out that all the beds are occupied over week ends so how would you increase the production of a hospital-if I may use that word-by 25 per cent when all the beds are occupied over the week ends?

I say that many patients lying in hospitals on Fridays could be sent home it there were other patients coming in for necessary surgery; but since the staffs of the hospitals-I refer particularly to nursing staffs-are reduced at the week ends, surgeons do not like to operate on Fridays, and patients who might go home on Friday are told "Well, Sunday afternoon will be a nice time because your family will be free. Your husband can come and look after you," or if it is a man they say his wife can come for him. In this way these patients are convalescent from Friday afternoon to Sunday evening and the hospital collects the normal day's rate from the provincial authority because the bed is being occupied, but it is not being occupied to the greatest possible advantage.
If we were paying day premium rates of pay and the hospitals had full staffs seven days a week, including Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, I am confident the admitting committees of the hospitals would clear out of the hospitals on Fridays many people who remain in them as convalescents; surgeons would be able to operate on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, and you would get 25 per cent more production out of the hospitals without increasing your capital grants or increasing the size of the hospitals.
I have to pay a little tribute here-and I have to say "little" because I am a Liberal- to Hon. Matthew Dymond, the minister of health for the province of Ontario who, since we are both Presbyterians, is a very good friend of mine. Some years ago he told me about a hospital in Ontario wanting a tremendous grant for a great big addition. Its management said it was overcrowded; if it did not get a big addition all hell would break loose, and there would be disease and epidemics in the town. Dr. Dymond, who was a practising physician in the town of Port Perry and the city of Oshawa, listened to their argument for increasing the number of operating suites in the hospital, and he told them "Before I can give any answer to your request I would like you to supply me with a schedule of your operations in the surgical suites."
This hospital had four surgeries, and when he got the timetables of the operations performed in those suites over the previous two or three years he discovered something he had already suspected, that they were operating from seven o'clock in the morning until about one o'clock in the afternoon, and the only operations that went on in the four
Supply-Health and Welfare surgeries in the afternoons and evenings, and on Sundays and holidays, were emergencies.
Dr. Matthew Dymond said to these people who wanted to increase the number of their surgeries and the size of their hospital, "Why don't you operate more in the afternoons?" The doctor who replied said, "You can't operate in the afternoon. You operate in the morning because the patient has been well rested, the diet has been looked after, and his stomach is clear." Dr. Dymond then said, "If you had an automobile collision and eight people required emergency surgery at four o'clock in the afternoon, surely you would not schedule their operations for the next morning? If you can operate on emergency cases no matter at what hour they occur, why can't you operate on ordinary civilian patients in the afternoons?" As a result of his definite stand on this matter the hospital in question rescheduled its surgical suites, and he found that with that rescheduling he could give it a grant of one quarter of what it wanted to increase the number of its beds. But they got no grant to increase the size of their surgical suites.
I tell that story to show that hospital facilities could be used to a greater extent if more thought were given to the conduct of hospital affairs. I say again that if we had day premium rates of pay in hospitals, the effective capacity of our present institutions could be increased by 25 per cent.
No doubt we will hear a lot of talk about the provincial by-election yesterday in Riv-erdale, Ontario. I hope I am not out of order when I point out that the government of the province is Conservative. It appears from the early returns that the New Democratic party has won the riding, with the Liberal candidate second and the Conservative third. I make this statement as a resident of metropolitan Toronto, that the biggest influence in that byelection was the half empty Riverdale hospital which stands right in the middle of the riding.
Here is a hospital with more than 808 beds. Some 450 of them are empty, and they have been empty for more than a year, due to the lack of nursing staff. Officials in Toronto have gone to Great Britain; they have spent a good deal of money and effort to recruit staff there. But because of the rates of pay now prevailing in Canada they have not been able to attract sufficient nurses from Britain to staff that hospital. The rates of pay offered by the province are not sufficient to attract married nurses to return to hospital work, and many of the nurses who staff our institutions today are married women. As a result this hospital

Supply-Health and Welfare stands half empty, though it is possibly the most modem hospital in the Dominion of Canada today.
This, to me, indicates some weakness in hospital administration by the departments- and when I use the plural I am referring to both the federal and the provincial governments-with regard to the method of payment for nursing services. It seems odd to me this government, of which I am a supporter, is able to pay one third of the cost of day premium rates of pay for such employees as engineering and mechanical workers, and can pay shift differential rates to hospital staffs under the jurisdiction of the Department of Veterans Affairs, while declining to pay such rates to nurses directly under the control of the Department of National Health and Welfare.
The Department of Veterans Affairs has hospitals in all ten provinces, in which shift differentials are being paid. This is a wonderful example. Hospital staffs are well aware what is going on in these institutions. They are aware what is going on in Quebec, where these differentials have been paid for 15 years, as well as of the situation in Saskatchewan where they are also being paid. I would strongly urge the minister, who I know takes a great and intelligent interest in the work of her department, to consider seriously in the course of the spending of these estimates, an arrangement to provide for shift differential rates of pay and day premium rates of pay for all hospital personnel under her direct supervision. This would be an example to all those responsible for the administration of hospitals in those seven provinces whose governments do not admit that payment on this basis is the modern, 1964 approach to the labour question of today.
It is fortunate that the minister is a qualified lawyer in her own right. There is a small problem which I have discussed privately with officials of the government and of the Department of National Health and Welfare, and I think it is one which should be brought out on the national scene, if the radio and the press will publicize it. It has to do with the fact that government payments, such as old age pensions, cannot be attached by those to whom a recipient may owe money. I would not recommend that any great change should be made in this regard. I believe that people receiving what they call pension cheques, old age assistance cheques, should be protected. If they were not protected as they are at present I am sure many unscrupulous organizations would deprive them of their funds in a hurry.

However, workers in the hospital field come across a ridiculous situation. Among those who enter hospitals as patients are many over 70 years of age who we know are in receipt of old age assistance allowances. They are maintained at government expense because they do not have the benefit of a hospitalization plan and because their children refuse to pay expenses incurred by the hospitals in which their parents are lying.
There are times when I wonder whether I am fortunate to be engaged in hospital work on a voluntary basis, I become so incensed at some of the things which occur. On the other hand, of course, there are rewards; for instance, the kindness you see extended by hospital employees to the patients who come through the doors. But I know nothing which upsets me more than the unwillingness of many children, some of them in high places, to pay for the hospitalization of their parents, particularly when they are over 70 years of age. I know hospitals in Ontario which are caring for patients over 70 years of age who do not have the benefit of hospitalization plans, and when they ask the children if they will get their parents to sign over the old age pension cheques to help pay for the hospitalization costs, those children laugh in their faces. I would point out again that these cheques for $75 a month cannot be attached by legal action, or diverted in any way. The families get the money and spent it as they like.
The minister is, I know, deeply interested in every aspect of the work of her department. As I say, she takes an intelligent interest in its administration. In addition she is a lawyer in her own right. I would ask her now, on behalf of the hospitals of Ontario, to exercise her undoubted talent and ability in seeking to have some change made so as to deal with the situation I have described. When one government department makes a payment to a recipient who is entitled to it, surely another government department should be able to secure that money in order to defray an expense incurred by a recipient lying in a government paid hospital bed.
On the whole I have nothing but commendation for the minister and for the department, but these are thoughts which in my opinion should be brought forward. In conclusion I repeat my suggestion that the minister give serious consideration to instituting a system of shift differential rates of pay and day premium rates of pay in order to ease the shortage of hospital beds, especially by

encouraging married nurses to return to the stream of hospital service.


Mr. Rapp:: I should like to direct some questions to the minister of health and welfare concerning matters in which many of the towns in my constituency are extremely interested. Strictly speaking they relate more to the estimates of the privy council, because these are matters pertaining to grants by the centennial commission. But many of the people I represent would be interested to know whether hospitals can be built with the assistance of centenary grants. In many cases it would be most beneficial to those concerned, if this could be done, and I wonder if the minister is in a position to tell me whether these grants can be used for the purpose they have in mind so that a lasting monument may exist after these grants have been allocated. The reason they are so interested is that usually these hospital grants are not sufficient to permit some of these towns to build hospitals which are large enough to serve the rural areas. I should like the minister to give me an explanation in reply to my question.


Mr. Francis:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make some brief comments on two points. For some nine years I had the privilege of working in the department under the two predecessors of the present minister, the hon. member for Perth, who is in the house, and the hon. member for Essex East. I know that in the development of this department, which development is evidenced every year in the estimates which come before the house, there has been a broad measure of bipartisan agreement on the general objectives and work of the department. Many words of tribute, all of them well deserved, have been paid in the course of this debate to the deputy ministers, especially Dr. Cameron, Dr. Willard, and to Miss Waters, the very conscientious and capable secretary whose services will be very greatly missed.
I feel that at this point there are two matters worthy of consideration. First is the question of social and economic research. A good deal has been said about the need for medical research and the development of research in connection with physical fitness, dentistry and other aspects of the department. The Department of National Health and Welfare has developed a very capable staff over a period of years, who have consistently interested themselves in the general problems of the cost of health services and in investigating in depth the programs
Supply-Health and Welfare developed by the department. The dominion bureau of statistics through the health and welfare division publishes annual statistical reports which are available and distributed as part of its functions. I hope the department will not lose sight of the need for strengthening and developing of this type of staff.
At the time when the previous administration, I think quite properly, attempted to form a general assessment of the health picture and prepare material which would given some general, long term guide lines, it was decided that a royal commission would be the form of investigation and a separate staff, including those qualified in social and economic research, were engaged for this project. The results of the commission's work are very interesting. They have taken a very broad sweep of the spectrum of health services. They have also stated very clearly the aims and objectives for improving the nation's health in a most commendable fashion.
Those who have worked in this field realize the very sensitive problems in relation to the professions concerned, and no objectives in the health field can be secured without the active co-operation of the Canadian medical profession and other responsible groups. I hope the department will continue to follow the policy of retaining key members of its staff who are trained and qualified in this area, and will resort to the policy of hiring outside consultants for outside jobs only on special occasions. There is this continuous field staff available within the department for special assignments in relation to other areas of research, and this must be constantly kept in mind. I hope the proper emphasis on this type of research will also be maintained.
The second comment I want to make, Mr. Chairman, relates to the whole question of shared cost programs. This department is one which has applied the principle of shared cost programs as much as any department of government. There are others which have done so, but in terms of financial magnitude a program like hospital insurance looms very large. The correspondence tabled yesterday in this house by the Prime Minister deals with specific proposals on the subject to the provincial authorities. The Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act was put on the books in 1956 when the hon. member for Essex East was minister, although the agreements were signed and implemented by the succeeding administration. I might mention that one of the things I have retained and will always regard with affection is a

Supply-Health and Welfare photograph of the hon. member for Perth on the occasion of the signing of the first hospital insurance agreement with the province of Ontario.
Certainly the development of this program has been accompanied by many other events which I think are of fundamental value to the Canadian people. For example, there is the promotion of standard hospital accounting; promotion of standard statistical reporting procedures; the full participation through the dominion council of health at regular meetings of all the provincial authorities. When I hear spokesmen from the province of Quebec, both my colleagues in my own party and hon. members in other parts of the house, saying that Quebec is not a province like the others, nowhere was this more brought home than at these meetings at which spokesmen for this province also spoke up for people who were French speaking, and for institutions in other provinces similar to those in their own.
I would be less than frank, Mr. Chairman, if I did not say to this committee that I would be concerned about the effect of contracting out procedures if this had the result of removing a voice from the conference table. The regular conference table meetings which have taken place, at which the voice of the province of Quebec was frequently more than just a voice for its own province, are of great importance. If the effect of contracting out were to create two Canadas, one of which would be operating under a different set of rules from a federal authority, I think this would be a very serious matter and might have consequences which perhaps have not been fully considered to date for the long term development and implementation of programs.
There are many other aspects of this matter, and when the appropriate legislation is placed before the house dealing with tax abatement procedures and percentages I hope at that time to make further comments. However, I do feel that the department is to be commended for the work it has done in the development of these co-operative federal-provincial programs. In this regard the term we like to use is "nation-wide", not "national" or "uniform" in any centralized sense. But they should be uniform in the sense that every one has certain basic objectives, and that they get together at the conference table once every six or three months to review the administration of the programs, the gaps in the programs, the difficulties in the programs, and make recom-

mendations on necessary amendments to regulations-as they are in most cases- which could be enacted by order in council. This is a flexible procedure which could be maintained and was the very essence of many of the shared cost programs. I would hope there would not be any doctrinaire or rigid approach to the question which would destroy the flexibility, the sensitivity and the truly Canadian spirit which has been built into these federal-provincial co-operative relationships.
I repeat, I should not let this opportunity pass without indicating my concern over the possible destruction of relationships which have been very carefully built up over a long period of time. I have taken as only one example hospital insurance and health grants, which come immediately to mind, although many other programs on the welfare side are also involved in this package. I would think the minister, her officials and the staff of the department have given us a very good example of the way in which, freed from party slogans and the general ideas with which we become so often emotionally concerned, federal-provincial cooperation can be achieved, and I think the staff of her department are to be commended in this regard.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I should like to take this opportunity to make a few remarks about these very important estimates. First of all I wish to congratulate the minister for her diligence and the concern she has for her department, and I think all of us in fairness will admit that she has had a very trying and difficult period to go through in connection with the Canada pension plan, with all its complications and ramifications. Regardless of the delays in the past and the changes that have been required because of provincial demands, we all know her heart is in the right place, and we look forward to dealing with this plan in the very near future.
Mr. Chairman, I also thank her for her willingness to listen to the representatives of organizations, whether national or local, who have come to Ottawa. I think this is very fortunate indeed, because even those individuals at the centre of things can learn from those on the fringe of affairs, as it were, particularly with respect to problems concerning this department.
I should also like to pay tribute to her staff. I get along very well with the staff of the Department of National Health and Welfare because, as you know, it is not the responsibility of that department to promote

dams on the Arrow lake, and that makes some difference. During the 19 years I have been in this house 1 have always found the officials of every branch of this department willing to give every consideration to any problem brought to their attention, and to carry out inquiries and give explanations that were necessary.
May I state that I wholeheartedly support the remarks that have been made by previous speakers representing this party in the debate on these estimates, particularly in respect of the Canada pension plan and the report of the royal commission on health services. There is no need for me to repeat what has been so well said by previous speakers, except to emphasize my complete endorsation of their stand on these particular issues.
However, I do wish to bring to the attention of the minister one omission that has been brought to my attention in respect of the report of the royal commission on health services. This omission has been drawn to my attention by representatives of organizations in my constituency as well as by various other individuals. There are apparently no recommendations in that report in relation to continuing care facilities for older persons. I have discussed this question with the minister and with a number of individuals who are very interested in this situation. Women's organizations are particularly interested in this subject, and the problem is of great concern to small communities because of the direct association with the need for satisfactory after-care facilities and nursing homes.
I am not going to take the time of the house to make extended representations, though I had intended to speak at some length on this subject, but I can draw the attention of the minister and hon. members of this house to the general feeling that exists in my constituency, at least, by quoting from an editorial which appeared in the Trail Daily Times of August 14, 1964 under the heading "Aid for Continuing Care". Mr. Chairman, this newspaper strongly supports the Progressive Conservative party and takes a great deal of pleasure in ribbing the hon. member for Kootenay West whenever it has the opportunity. However, I agree with what is said in this editorial on this subject, and I should like to quote it. It states:
The report of the dominion royal commission on health services, commonly known as the Hall royal commission report, has a deficiency that is of serious local consequence.
It omits to provide for dominion participation in what are known as "continuing care facilities," in other words, nursing home type establishments.
Supply-Health and Welfare
This absence has jeopardized Rotary club plans to construct and operate such an institution as a sort of adjunct to the Trail-Tadanac hospital.
This would also apply to other hospitals. The editorial then continues as follows:
Months ago, health minister Eric Martin rejected a private enterprise proposal to build and operate a nursing home in Glenmerry. He came out strongly in support of the Rotary project because, he said, the Hall royal commission could be expected to recommend dominion participation in such public projects. The availability of dominion operating funds would enable the provincial government to place nursing homes on a per diem basis, similar to that obtaining in hospitals, thus effecting important economies for patients of modest resources.
This week, Mr. Martin sent the Times a copy of the text of representations the B.C. government has made to Ottawa in connection with the Hall report, and in it he says this:
"British Columbia deplores the fact that the report's recommendations do not encompass the field of continuing care for persons suffering from protracted illness and who require nursing care and periodic medical care over a long period of time.
Just as the provision of facilities and services for the care and treatment of persons who are acutely ill is of vital importance, and the development of convalescent and rehabilitative programs is also of great value, so too is the provision of long term care of major importance and worthy of being an integral part of any universal health services program.
Therefore.. .British Columbia urges the government of Canada to include under the provisions of the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act coverage for those persons receiving care in approved continuing care facilities."
I support that article in principle, although I must say that in view of the fact the government of British Columbia is about to loan the province of Quebec $100 million I cannot see how it can be short of funds to do this work in the immediate future.
Over a period of nearly 20 years I have had the pleasure of being either the president or a director of a community hospital, and as a result of that experience I know of the need for these facilities. Certain limited facilities are provided, but they are far too costly for many older persons. Just prior to my return to Ottawa I was speaking with a lady who told me of a friend of hers who had gone into a nursing home which charged $350 to $400 per month. She had stayed there until she had exhausted the $8,000 she had in the bank, which represented her life's savings. Then, of course, she had to leave the nursing home to be cared for by another friend who was willing to look after her on the basis of some assistance from her old age security.
There is a great need in this respect, and I do urge the minister to give some consideration to the situation. I understand consideration is being given by a number of

Supply-Health and Welfare national organizations, as well as by the minister and her officials. I think we should be able to find a solution to this problem, financial and otherwise, as a result of cooperation between federal and provincial governments which are willing to do their share and accept their responsibilities.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to bring one further matter to the attention of the minister in connection with this report. During my recent visit to my constituency I received a number of representations urging that the art of chiropractic be included on an equal basis with other health professions in any health program to be introduced. When I was a member of the British Columbia provincial legislature there was a discussion in this regard during a proposed amendment to the workmen's compensation act. Prior to this discussion the art of chiropractic was not included under the act. As a result of representations from various organizations in British Columbia the regulations under the workmen's compensation act were amended so that industrial casualties who were recommended by doctors could receive assistance from chiropractors. I will now read a card which was sent to me by a very well known citizen of the Arrow lakes:
It appears that the near future will see some form of government participation in a health care program. Chiropractic is a separate and distinct health service, not provided by any other profession. It is a health service which is required and used by many citizens of British Columbia. I therefore strongly urge that you, as my elected representative, endeavour to ensure that chiropractic is included on an equal basis with the other healing professions in any health program to be introduced.
I support that proposal from my personal experience and personal knowledge of what has been done with the proper use of the art of chiropractic, and I urge the minister to give consideration to this request.
I wish to support wholeheartedly the remarks made by the hon. member for Hamilton South with respect to the necessity for greater consideration of the needs of the mentally retarded and mentally ill in Canada. We must realize that the member for Hamilton South speaks with knowledge and from experience. Unfortunately I had to be absent from the house when he spoke, but I read his speech this morning. I think it was excellent, and I wish to endorse what he said in this respect. I do so wholeheartedly because I represent a riding in which the people themselves have tried to do something in this regard through the organization of the Kootenay society for handicapped
IMr. Herridge.l

children originated first by Dr. Endicott, a very well known doctor associated with the clinic at Trail, who has given years of service to this organization.
He had occasion recently to come to Ottawa. His colleagues were very anxious, as he himself was, that he should have the opportunity to meet the minister and discuss with her their experience with some of these problems locally. On behalf of the Kootenay society for handicapped children I want to express very sincere appreciation for the time the minister spent discussing this matter with their representative, Dr. Endicott, when we all know that she was particularly busy on the day in question. Dr. Endicott was very pleased, and he returned and made a report. I wish to read now from the minutes of a meeting of the board of governors of the Kootenay society for handicapped children held on June 21, 1964:
Dr. Endicott reported that he had visited Miss Judy LaMarsh in May. He stated that he had told her that the estimated cost of the complete plans for the Dr. Endicott home would be $500,000 and gave her a copy of the brief, on which he had made some marginal notes. He stated that there would be a dominion-provincial conference in Ottawa in October and that Miss LaMarsh particularly wanted "lay" people to attend, people from local societies and associations. She wanted the experts to be balanced by plain interested people. Dr. Endicott recommended that we send a delegate, which would cost about $400-$500.
They intend to do this, and this is the sort of approach I like in problems of this kind. 1 think ministers and officials of departments can learn from local people. I have had a few experiences involving one or two departments of the government when on occasion I have met an official who gives the impression that he is sitting on the right hand of the Almighty. I am very glad to say I have not had this experience with the Department of National Health and Welfare.
Dr. Endicott makes some suggestions which I want to bring to the attention of the committee because I think they indicate a lengthy study of the question. In writing to me about this matter he says:
As you know, we have analysed the problem as offering five possible solutions. The favoured one at present and the one supported by present federal grants is encouragement of retention in the parental home. This is the "experimental legislation" you presented to a meeting of our society in Trail some years ago. The expectation at that time, certainly by provincial officials, was that there would be an exodus from Woodlands of dependants whose parents would want their child and the grant. This did not occur. The second expectation has been disappointing also in so far as the waiting

list for admission to Woodlands has not decreased but is now almost three times greater, about 875 to 300.
There are 875 retarded children waiting to get into Woodlands in British Columbia, while at the same time the government of that province lends $100 million to the province of Quebec and tells people generally that they have not got the funds to care for these children.


Ralph Bronson Cowan: Quebec's needs may be greater.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Dr. Endicott continues:
A second solution is the large centralized institution of which Woodlands is an example. This solution suffers from a number of difficulties, the most important of which is to maintain public and parental interest and responsibility toward the dependant population of the institution. A degree of improvement has been accomplished locally in New Westminster but for the Kootenays this is a major difficulty. In addition, being a government institution it is too impersonal, too large and afflicted with high costs. This is the solution we have been attemtping to modify or change over the years.
He continues:
A third solution is to find foster homes. This is difficult to start with and lacks continuity to such a degree that servicing by social workers or voluntary personnel becomes well nigh impossible. In addition, rapid changes of home environment are distressing to the dependant individual and contribute to emotional instability which makes the problem of care particularly difficult in the mentally retarded adult.
This is what we have now come to call the Thatcher home solution of problems related to retarded or mentally undeveloped children.
A fourth solution has been tried many times. That is imposition of responsibility, with or without financial reward, onto a sibling, usually in my experience a daughter. I have yet to see it devoid of bitterness no matter how well intentioned the person might be at first. The interference with the personal life, the attitude of the partner in the marriage and the effect on the children in the sibling's family makes this almost inevitable. The eagerness of any person so threatened to find alternatives convinces me that it is not an acceptable solution in general.
Then he goes on to deal with the Kootenay society for handicapped children:
We offer a community based facility governed by a local voluntary organization capable of maintaining community and parental interest and responsibility for the dependant individuals. It would provide a facility for temporary care in case of family crisis such as illness of the mother. The main factor is continuity. This is offered by Woodlands or by siblings but cannot be achieved by any other method except the one our society offers. At some point in history the parental care breaks down, be it late or early. This second home, community based, with parental participation is potentially a reasonably more satisfactory solution. By making parents and community responsible for
Supply-Health and Welfare
operative costs it can be made competitively economical.
He goes on to deal with the necessity for co-operation by governments. I am very taken with the attitude of the officers of this society and their approach to the problem. I think it is along these lines that we are going to find a solution and meet this increasingly recognized need.
Before I conclude I wish to bring to the attention of the minister that during the past year, as usual since the Disabled Persons Act has been in force, I have met a number of persons who have made application for the allowance and been refused. I simply cannot understand why these applications have been refused. I have talked to some local doctors in Trail, Castlegar, Nelson, Nakusp and other areas in my constituency. Whenever one of these cases has been brought to their attention they have said also that they could not understand why the application was refused, because the person in question was completely unemployable. I understand the regulations are such that if they can look after themselves to some extent they are not considered eligible for the allowance.
I have discussed this question with doctors. I have discussed it with persons directly concerned. I have discussed it with the chairman of the disabled allowance board in Vancouver, that is the provincial authority. I have read the regulations, and I can see that the interpretation of the act is the main reason for the failure to grant the allowance when it seems obvious to any lay person that it is necessary. I can see before me now a young man in Castlegar who is completely disabled and who will never be able to earn a living at any ordinary occupation, yet he was rejected. I know of a lady in Nelson who is in similar circumstances and whose application was rejected just two or three months ago.
I do urge that there be some reconsideration of this situation and that if necessary amendments to the Disabled Persons Act should be introduced. I am sure the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre will agree with me that when this act was passed we were all under the impression that the act was going to cover the various types of cases I have been discussing. I am sure other members have had similar experiences. I believe this is a very serious situation. We boast about our production, our wealth, our economic activity and our prosperity. I say this in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, that any nation that cannot properly look after its young people, its dis-

Supply-Health and Welfare abled people and its senior citizens, and provide these essential services, has not yet evolved into what I would consider a Chris-tion civilization.


Mr.   Olio@: Mr. Chairman, I am sure you will indulge me for a minute or two. I have no criticism of the minister; I think she has been doing a fine job, but it would be out character for me to praise her too highly. I was much impressed with the speech made by the hon. member for York-Humber, although frankly I do not entirely agree with him that rates of pay are the solution to the nursing problem, nor would I like to think that mothers and wives who want to spend time on the week ends with their families and who would not go back to the hospital for $12 may go back for $20. I should like to say that if anyone in this house wants information about hospital administration, he would do well to spend an hour with the hon. member for York-Humber.
However, since the hon. member for York-Humber is a director of one, he does not want to get tough with hospitals. I should like to say to the minister that since she pays a good portion of the piper's fee, although she may not be able to call the tune I think her department should at least have the right to find out how that tune is being played, especially in so far as hospital administration is concerned. The hon. member for York-Humber mentioned that the hospitals are almost closed on week ends. We know this is true. However, there are other questions the minister might investigate, such as the allocation of beds to doctors; the qualifications that doctors must have in order to be on staff; the fact that a doctor, being on the staff of one hospital, cannot practice in another hospital, in fact cannot even walk in the door, though we presume he is a graduate doctor. These are things that are costing us money. Not only are they costing us money but they contribute to the maladministration of hospitals and the great shortage of beds. In fact, what is the civilian administration of a hospital? I do not even know if the term has any definition. Each hospital seems to be administered by itself. These are the things into which we have a right to inquire.
I should like to ask the minister to consider one other point which perhaps is timely now if the minister is considering the introduction of some sort of medical plan five years hence. She is a member of the legal profession, and I use the word "profession" only loosely because it is a legal business. I


have a feeling that the medical profession is no longer a profession but a medical business. I should like to ask her to concentrate on the problem we are going to faoe about five years from now when we try to introduce a medical plan, namely the shortage of doctors. Since we will be facing a very united group, I ask the treasury benches now if it would not be advisable for the government to consider training doctors at the government's expense. We should train as many doctors as could qualify by giving them scholarships. Then when we do think of introducing a medical plan there will be no shortage of doctors but rather a superfluity of doctors. Under those circumstances I doubt very much whether the medical profession would consider going on strike, as they have done in other places and at other times. We would be able to call upon a much larger group to staff these hospitals and look after the administration of a medical plan.


Miss LaMarsh:: Perhaps before the item carries I might attempt to answer a few of the questions which have been asked, at least in a cursory way. If I might start with the last speaker and his most interesting suggestion that if there is any conflict between the government and the medical profession which the government feels it cannot resolve successfully by winning over the doctors we should then circumvent the profession by establishing our own doctors, I would say to the hon. member that the government has not any intention of doing this. The Hall report has recommended that there be a very substantial increase in the federal government's participation in the provision of facilities to teach doctors, and that a great many more doctors should be produced. To this question the department is giving most sympathetic attention.
My honourable and esteemed friend from Kootenay West has dealt with a number of matters. He requested that I forgive him for having to leave for another appointment, and said he would read my remarks in Hansard. He spoke of the program which is being developed, and particularly the conference on retardation that will be held next month. He mentioned the special interest that his constituents have in the construction of new and specialized facilities for retardeds. He mentioned also his interest on behalf of a constituent in the inclusion of chiropractic services at the time any medical health plan is instituted. I should like to say that representatives of the chiropractic profession have frequently waited upon me since I have been

in office, and I have listened at length and with sympathy to the representations which they have made. Other interested people, notably the hon. member for Red Deer whose profession this is, have also made recommendations in this regard.
My hon. friend from Kootenay West also raised a problem concerning nursing homes and chronic hospitals, and inquired why it was that the Hall commission apparently did not deal with this particular problem. I would point out that there is a difference between the two types of facilities, and chronic hospitals come within federal government participation if included in the hospitalization scheme by the appropriate province. The differentiation between that type of facility and a nursing home, which is more appropriately a welfare facility, is probably the reason the health commission felt it should not deal with the matter as coming within the scope of its inquiry. It is a difficult area, and one in which there is an increasing interest on behalf of the aged.
My own interest in nursing homes has been increased by a number of representations I have had from hon. members and interested laymen, and this is a subject of study by the department, not only in connection with the type of facility-not strictly a nursing home but a chronic hospital-which is referred to in the Hall report. I can only say to my hon. friend that any announcement regarding support would be a matter of new government policy and cannot be made at this time.
The hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort-Tisdale rather caught me by surprise in asking whether hospitals may be built with centennial grants. I can only say to the hon. member it is an interesting question the answer to which I do not know, and I shall have to refer him to those who are responsible when their estimates come before us; or perhaps he might direct an inquiry to them.
There was a most interesting contribution by the hon. member for Peace River, who was looking ahead, and perhaps not so far ahead as many may think, into the question of the population explosion and the pollution of air and water. It may be he is not aware of the fact that in my department there is an environmental health branch whose responsibilities encompass very close liaison and collaboration with the provinces on the matter of air and water pollution.
The hon. member suggested the setting up of a joint committee of both houses to deal with the problems which will arise from
Supply-Health and Welfare overcrowding. His suggestion is one of great interest, although the question of overpopulation and overcrowding appears to have less application to this country than to most of the other developed countries of the world. Notwithstanding that, there can be no doubt that Canadians must take an interest in this as a world health problem which in the future, if not at home, from abroad will press upon their consciousness in the matter of food supply and other aspects. A cursory examination of a week's newspaper will find all kinds of groups, religious groups, lay groups, medical groups, showing increased agitation on the question of population explosion. I am very grateful for the comments made by the hon. member for Peace River which I shall take to heart and consider although, as he suggested, it may be some time before he sees any fruition from his suggestion.
The hon. member for Springfield, in his contribution last night and again today, as a dentist reflected his interest in things dental. He asked whether any steps were being taken to establish a specific dental health grant. I must say that at this time it is not in the contemplation of the department, although he knows there is assistance from health grants for particular dental projects. He also mentioned the matter of fluoridation, and suggested the federal government should be giving advice and direction in this regard.
He is aware, since it was elicited in response to a question put to my parliamentary secretary in my absence, of the department's view with respect to fluoridation. Oddly enough, fluoridation is a matter which evokes a tremendous emotional response. However, it is not a matter in which the federal government has any primary responsibilities, although we have undertaken studies on it. This is, as in smoking, a matter in which we can advise and consult with provincial governments, whose primary responsibility it is; and indeed in the matter of fluoridating water supplies this remains a question of local preference. However, the department has made clear its attitude with respect to the benefits to be gained from fluoridating water supplies.
A number of questions were asked last evening by the former minister, dealing with the appointment of a national welfare council for which legislation was provided during his term in office. It is anticipated that this council will be appointed later this fall. He also raised the question of whether the province of Saskatchewan had made any suggestion about a new relief program. I should like to say, as I said earlier, that this was

Supply-Health and Welfare discussed at the dominion-provincial conference of welfare ministers a couple of months ago, and I understand it is likely to be a matter of discussion if not for a future dominion conference of premiers at least for the conference of welfare ministers which will be reconvened later this fall. I think the hon. member for Perth is aware, as I am, from newspaper reports that this was a matter for discussion among the premiers when they met at Banff a month or two ago.
At the conference of welfare ministers which I called and attended a month or so ago, a great variety of views were expressed.
I do not know what position will be taken by Saskatchewan or any other province at the time of the next meeting, but I shall undertake to report to the House of Commons if there is any conclusion drawn as a result of those discussions.
Some questions were also asked by the hon. member for Perth about cost sharing arrangements with the provinces and the letters dealing with contracting out, which the Prime Minister tabled yesterday. I am sure the hon. member has now had an opportunity to read those letters in yesterday's Hansard and to hear the Prime Minister's answers earlier today during the question period, when he said this legislation will be forthcoming very soon. At that stage he will be able to question the matter at greater length.
I was grateful for the intervention by the hon. member for Carleton who, in the house, has shown a continuing interest in the department in which he worked for such a long period of time. I note with interest his remarks about the health grants and welfare grants, and his disinclination to see a change effected by contracting out.
Last night an hon. member suggested that family and youth allowances should be paid together. I thought I made this matter clear when the youth allowance legislation was passed in July. However, I should like to point out first that there is a considerable difference in approach as between the two pieces of legislation and there would be a considerable administrative difficulty; for, as is known, family allowance cheques are paid each month. This will not be the case with youth allowance cheques, particularly during the summer months, because July and August amounts will be paid in September when it is ascertained that a student has returned to school. It will be seen that there would be numerous adjustments back and forth if these were coupled in one cheque; therefore it is not anticipated that they will be paid in one

cheque. I may say, if anyone is concerned that this would cause an increase in the number of employees in my department, that the family allowances division is responsible for these allowances and their payment. The number of individuals we have had to add to the staff to deal with these allowances is fewer than the number we would have been obliged to add were we paying the allowances in one cheque. This is because of the necessity of making adjustments in September of each year.


Joseph Slogan: What happens when a term begins, say, in the middle of a month? Do they receive $10 for that month, or is a pro rata payment made?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: They get the whole amount.


Joseph Slogan: Are these cheques sent to the parents?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: To the parents. I have forgotten the date. I am not sure whether the hon. member for Springfield was here when this was discussed in committee in the house. There was a lively discussion at that time and many questions were dealt with. I would ask the hon. member to look at Hansard for that day. A great many questions dealing with the regulations were answered at that time, and I believe they will prove more useful in answering questions from correspondents and constituents than is normally the case.
During this discussion there has been a continuing refrain asking the government to spend more money. A number of hon. members have recommended that more money should be spent on family allowances, old age security, research of various kinds including medical research, fitness facilities and so on. As almost every item was dealt with in a general way, requests were made that more money should be spent. I should be happy to meet these requests, but last evening, while I was sitting here, I tried to figure out what sum of money would be required to meet the requests which have been made up to that point and I confess I was not able to come up with anything I would feel justified in placing before the Minister of Finance, particularly in one year. I would point out that there has already been a large increase in the estimates of this department.


Mr. Willoughby:: I feel-and I thought I made this clear last night-that to spend money in the direction I indicated would be a form of economy. Increased expenditures on research would encourage more

people to enter medical schools and remain in Canada. The situation under the present system is like pouring water into a sieve- the more you pour, the more goes out at the other end. I suggest the economy of our country would be better served if we spent more money on making it worth while, by improving research facilities, for these people to remain in Canada, and I urge the minister to do her best to take up with her colleagues in the government the idea of increasing the amount available for research here.


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I noted with interest the remarks of the hon. member last evening with respect to this matter. As he is aware, this is one of the questions dealt with by the Hall commission and it is consequently one of the subjects under active study by the 14 committees within the department.


Reid Scott: I should like to know what the government has been doing, or what measures it has under consideration, with regard to the high cost of drugs and medicines, particularly as it affects senior citizens. Most members of this committee have voluminous flies of information concerning the tremendous profits the drug companies are making, and are concerned with the exploitation of the public in the prescription field. Action taken in this area would not involve any additional expenditure by the government. For example, if a crown corporation could market some of these drugs a great deal of the profiteering could be eliminated and the moneys now being paid to the drug companies could be put to better use.


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Here again, specific recommendations are made in the Hall report regarding the provision of drugs. The suggestion is that drugs should be included in a comprehensive program, $1 being charged to the individual and the rest of the cost being absorbed by the federal government. The whole question of the cost of drugs is thus within the purview of the studies new being conducted. The fact that so many of these questions have been considered by the commission indicates the complexity of the Hall report and the problems raised in dealing with it. The range of subjects to be considered is extremely wide and hon. members will appreciate that in seeking to establish government policy one has to be concerned about priorities. I feel sure all members would agree that it would not be the proper course to begin to act piecemeal without reference to other actions which might be taken. Perhaps this is an unfortunate time at which to consider the estimates 20220-499
Supply-Health and Welfare of the department, having regard to the fact that we are now studying the Hall report. I mentioned specifically in my opening remarks that there is nothing in present estimates arising from the first volume of that report. Nevertheless I think every member, or at least every other member, made some reference to it, though these matters might more satisfactorily be discussed later this year, or next year.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Would the minister agree with me that the $1 proposed to be charged for drugs could be considered in the same vein as co-insurance?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I think I could. It should be noted, however, that in the Hall commission report three or four different approaches are made to cost sharing. The one mentioned by the hon. member is one of two or three different techniques which can be used to deter people from using a service, or to make people more aware of their responsibility toward a service, or simply as a means of raising some of the money needed. The mere title "co-insurance" does not indicate what the purpose of the technique is. That is one of the interesting things about the Hall report; there is no consistent line taken that financing should be accomplished in a certain way. A number of techniques are suggested for various parts of the service. This is another field in which a decision will have to be made by the government. Should one charge the person who is well, or the person who is sick in hospital? I know the hon. member is interested in this question. I know he believes there is a disagreement in principle arising from the term itself. It arises, I would say, from his feeling on philosophic grounds that when one is sick he should not be charged, but that prepayment should be made as a kind of insurance so as to carry the cost at a time when one's resources are not depleted by illness. I believe this is a difference in philosophy rather than a difference in terms.


Joseph Slogan: Could I ask the minister whether she could inform me what amount in this year's estimates is allocated to dental research? I mentioned earlier that over each of the past three years, although the national health grants have been increased the amount allocated to dental research has decreased. I was wondering whether the minister could give me an idea whether the amount is being increased this year or whether it is continuing to decrease.

Supply-Health and Welfare
Perhaps at the same time the minister could answer my other question regarding the earmarking of specific dental health grants. This matter has been under consideration in the department for some time and I should like to know if a decision has been reached.


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Mr. Chairman, I am not able to give a specific amount as being allocated to dental research this year because it depends on what projects come in from the provinces and are approved. There is some $15,017,000 this year allocated to health grants, which include dental grants. I am sorry my hon. friend was not here when I began my remarks because his question about the provision of a special dental grant I did answer.


Joseph Slogan: In the negative?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Yes.
I think I have dealt, Mr. Chairman, with all outstanding questions. I have attempted to make notes of them and to refer to them as they came up. There was also a question asked by the hon. member for York-Humber about nurses' wages. I know he appreciates that wages are a matter which lies between the hospital boards and the nurses they hire. We pay about 50 per cent of the cost of administration of hospitals. If higher wages are involved we still pay that amount. Our only direct responsibility of course for wages is with regard to nurses we employ ourselves. I am not wholly persuaded that the spirit of Florence Nightingale is so distant that $20 will bring a nurse in to work on Sundays whereas $12 will not, but I will look into that matter.
I might also mention that this year, because of the increase in the amount of hospital insurance, we have set up a group to deal directly with the provinces in an attempt to keep the cost under control in all provinces. That was done at their request following the last meeting of provincial ministers of health and the advisory council of health. This group will, among other things, be looking into the cost on a provincial basis of nursing services as well as other services.
If there is something I have forgotten to refer to I would be very happy to attempt to answer it. I hope all hon. members of the committee will feel that no attempt is being made to throttle them or to keep them from speaking either at length or cursorily. Such matters as the survey of the aged to which the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George referred last night are most interesting ideas

and will give food for much thought within the department. However, the main estimates and supplementary estimates of the department were subjected to two or three days scrutiny previously, and the whole of yesterday as well, and it is hoped that by now I will have satisfied all hon. members of the committee and that we should be able to proceed through the estimates.


Reid Scott: Could I ask a question? The minister knows that over the last six or nine months we have been discussing in this house the policy of the government on hospital grants. I do not want to go through all the material which is on record but I would ask whether the government is reviewing this policy. The problem, as the minister probably knows, is that the gap between federal and provincial grants and the actual cost of hospital operation is very substantial, one which many municipalities feel they are unable to shoulder. I am wondering what the minister is doing or is thinking in this regard. Is there a reappraisal of the size of the grant structure, and can we look for any upward revision during the next year?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I think I answered that question previously, Mr. Chairman. This matter was discussed before the meeting of the ministers of health and also before the premiers meeting, and there was far from unanimity on any question of increasing the grants. I must say to my hon. friend that I do not intend to hold out any particular hope to him that there will be any increase in any of the grants. This is not in line with the thinking of the department or of the government at this time because it does tend to create an imbalance. Since the construction of health facilities is one of the first things which will have to be done before any contemplation of a national health scheme, the protection of the department is given to the over-all construction of such projects as medical schools and other facilities to see what if any additional help is required from the federal government.
No consideration is being given to increasing the grant per bed of the ordinary hospital. I think I have told my hon. friend before, but if not I should like to now, that there are really three provinces particularly short of hospital beds-the province of Nova Scotia, and the provinces of Quebec and Ontario. That is rather astonishing when you consider that the two richest provinces are Ontario and Quebec. The amounts which were allocated by the previous government to hospital construction run until 1968. How-

ever, some provinces, such as the province of Nova Scotia, have already allocated all their moneys, which means that as new needs arise in individual communities there is no more federal money to allocate. Requests have recently been made for specific sums to be allocated to these three provinces in particular, but it should be appreciated that if this were done it would hardly appear fair to the other provinces.
Toronto is a special problem where, as was pointed out by the hon. member for York-Humber, there are hospitals such as the one in Riverdale; and certainly the hon. member and his party are doubtless very glad, in a sense, that this was not made an issue in the recent election, although perhaps more attention will be directed toward it now. But because metropolitan Toronto, under the chairmanship of Mr. Gardner went out of the hospital construction field and did not give any grant when the grant was increased in 1958, there has been a lag in Toronto. It would hardly seem fair if the rest of the taxpayers across the country were asked to make up for this lag, which was caused by the metropolitan government of that time.
Really it is a pretty sterile exercise to worry about who is responsible for this or for that, and why it is that we do not have these facilities. It really does not matter why we do not have them; the fact is that we do not have them when we need them. There is no question about the provincial department of health of Ontario facing a grave problem at the moment, because it is not. While the provincial minister of health said that there was a surplus of beds in Ontario, the unfortunate thing is that this surplus was not in the same place that there was a surplus of patients who need those beds, and you just cannot move a bed from North Bay down to Toronto when you need it. The difficulty is the possibility of overbuilding, and overbuilding at a time when building costs are very expensive in certain places.
When you are faced with a situation such as that in respect of the Riverdale hospital, which is constructed in a place where the need for beds has been apparent but you cannot staff it, you only increase the difficulty by following that suggested course. I think my hon. friend knows that my department and the Department of Veterans Affairs are as gravely upset as he about the current situation in Toronto, as well as the situation in certain areas of Nova Scotia. As I said earlier, while I cannot indicate at this time what our answer will be, it does not appear to be of
Supply-Health and Welfare the order of increasing the dollars for bed grants.


Reid Scott: I thank the hon. minister for her explanation and I am glad to hear there is some consideration being given to finding a solution to this problem on a long term basis. I think we are all naive if we feel the health plan and its provisions are going to be implemented in the near future. What concerns me is what are we going to do today to provide short term relief.
I have in mind the hospitals in the Scarborough area in respect of which my doctor friends tell me there are something like 22 children's beds for a population, under 15 years of age, of 90,000, and that if they had a hospital today with 100 beds for children it would be staffed and filled by midnight with only very urgent cases.
It is certainly logically correct to say that some over-all plan has to be developed and facilities have to be provided prior to the implementation of a health scheme, but is the department not prepared to attempt to do something to give some relief in the intervening years? I have mentioned this problem In respect of children, and we are trying in Scarborough to build additions to the hospitals, but the cost is very high. I regret that we cannot look for any assistance from the federal government. Would the government contemplate matching the provincial grant, which I think in Ontario is now about $5,500 as contrasted with $3,000 on the part of the federal government? After all, without being too political, we have been promised health insurance for 45 years and are still anxiously awaiting it. I am not suggesting that it will be held up for another 45 years, but there are many problems involved and it will be some time yet before it is implemented. I am sorry to hear that we cannot look for any short run assistance at all from the federal government through the minister's department.


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: As I pointed out, such assistance will come through co-operation between the veterans affairs department and the authorities in Toronto. I think one should also bear in mind that the provincial government made an announcement after a discussion with us and without any recriminations against the federal government, because it realized this is its own responsibility, rather than a federal responsibility, for long term low cost loans to individual hospital boards.
My hon. friend is a good enough lawyer to realize that one of the difficulties is that of ascertaining when it is fair to make special

Supply-Health and Welfare grants, or pour special money into certain areas and at the same time withhold it from everywhere else, and of ascertaining when such a thing is not justifiable. Certainly taking an area with the highest level of income in the whole country and attempting to justify the necessity of more federal money for that area, while at the same time not giving more to other parts of the country, is a proposition which, if I adopted it, my hon. friend would be the first to attack in this house. I should like to make it very clear that there is no suggestion at the moment for emergency grants of any kind increasing the present grants to that area. We are working with the provincial departments of health in order to help in any way that is fair and possible so they can meet their responsibilities in this regard.


Joseph Slogan: I have a question I should like to ask the minister. I have brought this matter to the attention of the department, and I should like to know whether the minister can tell me that it has been solved or, if not, consideration is being given. The question relates to Indian and northern health services. As I understand the situation, when an Indian leaves a reservation and stays away for 12 months he is no longer eligible for medical services. I grew up on the old St. Peters Indian reserve from which the Indians were moved to Hodgson reserve, although a number did not want to go and remained on the old lands. These Indians are still treaty Indians living on their original lands; however, they are not eligible for medical services. Some of them have come to me and, rather than get them involved in a lot of red tape, I have provided services gratis, although I do not think that is a fair situation. The Indians who leave the reservations do so in an attempt to integrate with society, but once they leave the reserve they no longer have the privileges extended to the Indians who stay on the reserves. I think these people are particularly deserving in this respect, and that this practice is grossly discriminatory against them. Is the minister aware of this situation, and can she do something about it?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Mr. Chairman, I should be very pleased if my hon. friend would send me a note in this regard, and I will look into the situation.


Ralph Bronson Cowan: Mr. Chairman, approximately 20 minutes ago, the minister in reply to some comments made by the hon. member for Danforth referred to the shortage of beds in

certain areas of the country, and pointed out that there was a woeful shortage in Nova Scotia, Quebec and Ontario, and that this was a peculiar situation in view of Quebec and Ontario being the two richest provinces in Canada. At that time I looked around this chamber and counted seven hon. members from the province of Quebec, not those who are presently here, and I was surprised that not one of those members took objection. I am wondering now how long equalization payments will continue to be made to Quebec.


Mr.   Scoll@: Answer yes or no.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health services-
15. To authorize hospital construction grants to the provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates and under terms and conditions approved by the governor in council including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $29,666,575, $20,000,000.
Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Mr. Chairman, I waited until you called vote No. 15 before speaking because there is a statutory provision of course for contributions to the provinces under agreements entered into pursuant to the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act, chapter 28. Perhaps the Minister of National Health and Welfare is becoming a little weary of the representations being made to her about the discriminatory action against the province of Alberta in so far as the formula used for shared programs is concerned. Mr. Chairman, so long as this injustice continues and there is no satisfactory reason given, other than that there is a disagreement in principle, we shall continue to make these representations whether it is trying the patience of the minister or not.
Throughout the past few months we have heard a great deal about something called co-operative federalism, and during July and August when the new fiscal arrangements between the provinces and the federal government were being passed through this house, this term "co-operative federalism" was used a great deal.
On more than one occasion several ministers of the crown, including the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, have said that the provinces have a certain area of jurisdiction and that the federal government has a responsibility to treat citizens of Canada throughout the nation in the same way. Yet we have this discriminatory action with respect to sharing the cost of hospital-

ization continuing, and apparently a stubborn refusal on the part of the government, particularly the Minister of National Health and Welfare, to recognize that the province of Alberta as well as other provinces ought to have the right to administer these acts in the way they choose.
The premier, minister of finance and minister of health of the province of Alberta have been to Ottawa on a number of occasions to put forward the view that they believe that a so-called deterrent fee of $1.60 to $2 per day is not only a valid and justifiable means of collecting some part of the cost of operating hospitals but also acts as a deterrent in that it leaves some responsibility for this service with the individual. I want to quote from a speech made by the minister of health of the province of Alberta on February 15 of this year in which he said in part:
In the first place, it certainly discourages abuse of hospital benefits. I don't suggest that many people are going to stay in the hospital when they don't have to be there, just because it doesn't cost them anything to be in the hospital, but certainly the daily charge that is levied against the patient ensures that no one is going to remain in the hospital any longer than they require the hospital care. This is important in order to make beds available for those who need them more. In addition to this, the co-insurance fee is a method of dividing financial responsibility in an equitable manner between the individual who is getting the benefits of the service and the public who are paying the rest of the bill.
A few minutes ago the Minister of National Health and Welfare suggested that this principle might be accepted with regard to the recommendations of the Hall commission report. In other words, when we reach the stage where the federal government is going to set up a national medicare or medical scheme the government will probably accept the recommendation in the Hall report that there be a deterrent fee so that there will be some individual responsibility for the services provided. With regard to the argument that no one who is sick and in a hospital should be obliged to pay any part of the cost, in other words, that it is the wrong time to collect any fee or payment when a person is sick, the minister certainly is not going to try to argue that everyone who tries to enter a hospital is destitute any more than it can be argued that every person requiring drugs is destitute. I would say that over 95 per cent of the people have resources that they can use in order to pay a small deterrent fee when they are in hospital, and to argue that it is not right or fair to collect a small deterrent fee when the person is using the facilities 20220-500
Supply-Health and Welfare of a $24 a day hospital bed is no more correct than to say that there should not be a deterrent fee for the person requiring drugs. I think it can be argued equally well that no person should be charged for drugs when they need them if you are going to argue there should be no charge for the use of hospital services.
So, Mr. Chairman, the argument breaks down. But the interesting point is whether the province of Alberta is going to have to wait until the federal government accepts the principle of a deterrent fee. Apparently somewhere along the way, whether a few months or a few years from now, consideration is to be given to adopting the same kind of method that the province of Alberta has considered right and proper up until this time.
From 1957 and 1958 when the agreements were first made the province has used a deterrent fee of varying amounts. I think it started out at $1 per day. In relation to the actual cost of operating the hospital beds the amount charged today is no more than the initial amount. We think the present situation is unfair. We have had no satisfactory explanation except that there is some disagreement in principle. But today the minister told the committee that there is some validity to the argument with respect to drugs and perhaps a fee of $1 per prescription ought to be charged. She even went so far as to say this would bring about a certain amount of individual responsibility for these services so that they would not be abused.
I contend that this argument applies equally to the use of hospital beds. At the present time the taxpayers of the province of Alberta are having to pay approximately $1,700,000 over and above what they ought to be paying in relation to the other provinces. Perhaps $1,700,000 a year is not a large amount but it is the result of a discriminatory practice that we think should be changed. As a matter of fact, the Prime Minister had something to say about shared programs when he spoke to the federal-provincial conference on November 26, 1963. At that time he said:
In many areas the federal and provincial governments are responsible for parallel action within their respective jurisdictions. Each must operate in its own sphere of jurisdiction, and respect the other sphere. That is essential to both the letter and the spirit of our constitution.
Then he went on to say:
Such consultation and co-operation can be effective only if they are mutual, working in both directions. This is essentially what I have had in mind when speaking about the need for a "cooperative federalism".

Supply-Health and Welfare In so far as resolving this problem is concerned there has been no consideration for the viewpoint expressed by the province of Alberta. For the past six or seven years they have repeatedly made representations to the federal government and so far, as I said, there has been a stubborn refusal on the part of the Department of National Health and Welfare to acknowledge the right of the province of Alberta, which is responsible for the administration of the act, to run its affairs in the way it chooses.
The federal government has not interfered with some of the other provinces which choose to levy an insurance premium. They do not deduct this from the approved costs of operating hospital wards. They do not take any objection to some provinces choosing to collect a part or in some cases all of their share of hospitalization costs through a retail sales tax or something of that nature. Officials of the province of Alberta have objected to the federal department very forcefully. I have here a letter dated November 23, 1962, addressed to the former minister from Hon. J. Donovan Hoss, minister of health of Alberta, in which he says in part:
Co-insuranee charges in Alberta are considered by us to be equivalent of premium payments made in certain of the other provinces and should be accorded the same treatment.
I do not want to belabour this point, Mr. Chairman, but I must say to th.e minister that if some consideration is not going to be given to these very valid representations we are going to have to continue to belabour the point every time an opportunity arises.
I am not going to take the time now to go back into some of the other discriminatory measures contained in the new federal-provincial fiscal arrangements. However, this discriminatory action is not confined to the Hospitalization and Diagnostic Services Act. There are many other areas. This discrimination has been going on for a very long time. The argument, in so far as the government of Alberta is concerned, is valid and they have a right to administer this measure in the way they see fit without any interpretation of the regulations by the federal government to discriminate against Alberta and thus cause Alberta to pay a proportionately higher share of the cost of hospitalization all over Canada.
In case anyone is interested, Mr. Chairman, the collection of federal taxes in Alberta in the year 1962 was divided as follows: individual income tax, $126 million; corporations, $66 million; non-residents tax, $2

million, for a total of $194,758,000. Then, there was $5 million from the estate tax. On the basis of a population division, there was about $136 million from sales tax, excise tax, customs duties and so on. In total, the residents of Alberta paid $335,815,000 into the federal treasury. There were direct grants of $29 million in one form or another paid back to the province of Alberta. These were for a number of things including hospitalization grants. There was about $57 million paid under the tax agreements, and a share of a public utility amounting to $1 million. In any event, the total repayments to the government of the province amounted to some $90,794,000.
The injustice, Mr. Chairman, is that the residents of Alberta are paying into the federal treasury their share, and then some, on a per capita basis of the funds that go into the federal treasury. Then when it comes to a redistribution of those federal moneys, we find there is a discriminatory action against the province. I hope the minister and the officials of her department will take another look at this action to see if they cannot interpret the regulations in keeping with the spirit that has been expressed by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance on a number of occasions, that all provinces have the right to administer their affairs in the way they choose and that all provinces shall be treated equally.


The Deputy Chairman:: Shall vote 15 carry?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: No answer?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I shall be glad to answer and tell the hon. member what he already knows. I have said a number of times, as my hon. friend is aware, that perhaps the most persuasive member of his party, the premier of Alberta, came to Ottawa and discussed this matter with the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance, myself and our officials. The province of Alberta signed an agreement in writing, then knowing what the results would be. It now seeks to persuade the federal government to change this agreement. These representations were urged upon my predecessor as they have been urged upon me. It is simply a fact that we do not agree the deterrent fee is anything comparable to an insurance fee. We do not agree that it is a good principle to require an individual who is seeking a bed to pay a per diem charge. It is that fundamental a disagreement.
My hon. friend has said that I just finished saying I agreed in principle with the user

charge of $1 per drug prescription. I protested, Mr. Chairman, that I did not say it. I referred to the fact the royal commission had mentioned this as a way of raising money or as a deterrent charge, and I used this as one example which was given in the health report, certainly without indicating the government would adopt or approve such a proposal. Despite the very vigorous address of my hon. friend, I cannot hold out any hope there will be a change in attitude because the disagreement is fundamental and basic, notwithstanding the very good relationship there is between the Prime Minister and myself, and the premier of Alberta and the minister of health there, with whom I have had many discussions. It is felt that the authorized charge cannot be increased without the necessity then of reducing the federal contribution. There is no question but that Alberta can, if it chooses, increase from $1.50 or $2 to $5 the amount they wish to charge someone who is ill to go into hospital. This would simply mean the federal government would not share, in the same proportion which it presently does, the total cost of hospitalization.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: If I misinterpreted anything the minister said, I want to apologize for that. Perhaps I did not hear her say that the thoughts she was expressing were some of the recommendations in the Hall report.
I should like to ask her if the premier of Saskatchewan, Premier Thatcher, has made any representations to her department to get the concurrence of the department with regard to the dispensation that would be made of deterrent fees? I understand he is seriously considering this as a valid and proper way of raising some of the funds required for the province's share of hospitalization.
The other point that was made was that the agreement signed some six or seven years ago must stand, notwithstanding the fact that there are changes taking place all the time. One of those changes is the cost of operating hospitals, which has been rising substantially. Will the minister tell us if there have been representations from Saskatchewan recognizing this as a valid way of collecting funds to pay the province's share? Have there been representations from any of the other provinces?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: 
James Ernest Pascoe: Mr. Chairman, I have a question dealing with hospital construction grants which will require detailed information that the minister may not be able to supply right now, but she might be good enough to provide me with it by letter. The details of this vote show a little over $2J million for Saskatchewan. Will it be possible to have a breakdown on where this money went? Further, it shows an item of $9,666,577 for commitments, but points out that it was not necessary to spend this money. Does this indicate that some hospitals which were approved were not constructed?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: No; with respect to the last question it means they were not finished. I would be very happy to reply to my hon. friend by letter, if that would satisfy him.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Welfare services-
40. Administration, operation and maintenance, including grants as detailed in the estimates, $4,060,300.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Before vote No. 40 carries there are a few repetitious things I would like to say. I hope that does not rule me out of order, but it has been my experience in the house that with some things on which one feels strongly one has to repeat oneself quite often.

Supply-Health and Welfare
I listened with interest to the minister's remarks summing up the discussion on item 1. She has her own inimitable way of putting people off, but she does not put me off by the suggestion that there is a refrain running through many of our speeches, the refrain of more money being wanted for this or that particular program. This item is a general administrative one covering the various programs that come under the heading of old age assistance and the various other pension benefits.
Despite what the minister said today, and despite the concentration being placed on the benefits that will flow from the Canada pension plan, we have not reached the end of the road with respect to old age security and the other pension programs that come under the responsibility of this department. When I heard the minister say that we should not be asking for these things because they all cost money in terms that she could not calculate, I could not help but recall that that was the kind of answer I got when I first came to the House of Commons some 22 years ago.
At that time the old age pension was $20 a month. I was a very brave new member. I dared to suggest the pension should be increased to $30 a month and was told by the minister of finance-because at that time the old age pension came under the Department of Finance, not under the department of pensions and national health as it was then known-the same thing that the minister said today, that it would cost such a huge sum of money, that it was impossible. Later, when I got really brave and went out on a limb and suggested the abolition of the means test, I almost expected to be certified because of the attitude displayed on the government side.
We have moved a long way since that day, but we are not at the end of the road in terms of providing security and dignity and decency for our older people, and for other members of our society who do have a claim on the affluence and the abundance of our times.
I recognize that the Canada pension plan if we get it, as I hope we will this year, and if it becomes operative in 1966, as I hope it will, is going to make a real contribution to this whole problem of security for people of older years and, in some cases, for people not quite so old in years. But the problems that are coped with by old age security, old age assistance, the Blind Persons Act and the Disabled Persons Act are still with us, and I urge the minister and her department, busy as they are with the Canada pension plan

and studying the Hall report, not to neglect to consider the needs for improvement in these other acts, for the benefit of all those people who will get nothing from the Canada pension plan because they are now 70 or over, or will be over 70 before it becomes operative. For all these people it is not good enough to provide them with just $75 a month. That figure should be increased, as I said yesterday, to $100.
There is also the whole question of reducing the eligible age. I know the Canada pension plan will make it possible, when it becomes fully operative, for people to draw $51 a month at age 65 without a means test. That is good, but it will take several years before that point is reached, and to ask people in this latter part of the twentieth century to settle for $51 a month for the rest of their lives surely is not consistent with what we are capable of doing.
I think I have read everything the minister has put out concerning the Canada pension plan, and I may say she has kept us pretty busy in that respect. I have also read the Liberal party literature with regard to pensions that was published in the last two election campaigns. I read the three white papers -the first one is getting a bit yellow and the second one a bit grey. 1 hope we can act on the third one while it is still white.
I read with interest the speech the minister was to have made in Toronto in September last, and which was made on her behalf by her parliamentary secretary. I read with interest the speech made some months ago in Kingston by the hon. member who is now the Minister of National Revenue, a speech which seemed to be an authoritative statement on the Canada pension plan. I have also read, though not every line of it, the actuarial report prepared by the government on the Canada pension plan. That was produced last year and in that document there appeared one statement I have not found anywhere else in all this literature, that is, an admission of the fact that even when the Canada pension plan becomes operative the old age security figure will not remain at $75 a month, and that as time goes on it will have to go up even as adjustments are made to the Canada pension plan.
I had hoped that that admission which was contained in the actuarial report would have appeared in the white paper in one or other of its versions. It is not there yet, but so far as I am able to watch the minister's nods up and down and right and left as I speak, I gather she agrees with me that $75 a

month is not a figure fixed for all time for old age security.
Even though it would have to devote some time to it, I urge the department to do some re-assessing of the pensions and benefits paid under these various pieces of legislation. It is going to be fine, a quarter of a century from now, when people who retire under the Canada pension plan will have a reasonable amount on which to retire. It is going to be fine, v/hen people who become disabled and people who have dependants will have something reasonable to live on; but what about people in 1964 and 1965, and during the rest of this decade and the early part of the next one? If we are going to be consistent in our desire to improve the social security position, that desire must not only be for the future but also for the present. Therefore I rise to express the hope that some of the time of the department will be spent on reassessing these various statutes, the Old Age Security Act, the Disabled Persons Act, the Blind Persons Act and others that this department administers. It does seem to me the amounts paid under these acts need to be increased and that other changes need to be made.
My hon. friend from Kootenay West referred earlier today to the eligibility conditions in the Disabled Persons Act. All of us hear a great many sad stories in this connection. If I might mention one other matter, there is the requirement with respect to old age security benefits that one last year be spent in Canada before people can receive payments. In the case of people who have lived all their lives in Canada but who, at 65 or 68, have to go to the United Kingdom, or the United States, for reasons of health or for economic or family reasons, it is hard to explain to them that despite all the time they have spent in this country they cannot draw old age security payments unless they return and manage to spend one more year in Canada. This is a detail, as I have said, but it is an awkward detail in the experience of a good many people.
The over-all submission I am making is one which I hope the minister will take seriously. Yes, she is doing a good job in her fight to get the Canada pension plan. I suspect she has to fight a lot harder for it than some of us may realize. Yes, she is doing well to have 14 committees studying the Hall report, and I hope we will get moving soon toward a health charter for Canadians. But in doing all these things I ask that she and her department not forget the improve-
Supply-Health and Welfare ments needed by those people who have to depend on the pensions, benefits and allowances they get under these various other acts. I urge that these things be attended to as well.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to make a long speech; I will only make a few comments concerning item 40 of the estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare.
I think the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) dealt to some extent with the matter I intended to cover, but I hope I will nevertheless be allowed to make a few suggestions, not only for the good of the Canadian people but also to help the government in its administration of the old age pension and family allowances programs.
It is a well known fact that at present the pensions or the amounts paid by the federal government to assist certain destitute people or certain persons in the provinces, are completely administered by the provinces. By the way, the hon. member for Medicine Hat (Mr. Olson) referred to those agreements a while ago.
Now, I must congratulate the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Miss LaMarsh) for her efficiency and for the courtesy with which she gives us answers and deals with the cases submitted to her. I wish to express special thanks.
It is true that a minister may not always control everything and look after every detail as he would like to, and it is precisely on that point that I wish to make certain observations concerning some administrative officers, who may come under provincial jurisdiction, in respect of amounts paid out by the federal government. In some cases, there is discrimination. It is true that the federal government makes those payments heartily and that the provincial governments try to administer them in the same manner, at least I am quite prepared to believe it. But every general rule has its exceptions.
In this field, unfortunately, exceptions are not rare. I think it may be caused by overzealous persons, and since we are all human, there may be also, in certain cases, personal feelings involved; that is why we, as members of the House of Commons, very often receive complaints in regard to the procedures followed by the officials in the distribution of pensions.
I am thinking here, for instance, of certain cases where the federal minister or depart-

Supply-Health and Weljare ment grants an old age pension wholly administered by the federal government but which, afterwards, may be transferred to one of the social welfare administrations of the province.
I can recall two particular cases. The first is not necessarily one of old age pension-and I am quite willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the civil servants, federal or provincial, who conducted the inquiry which showed that the person in question, being mentally deficient, was unable to look after his pension.
As for the second case, with which I am personally familiar, it could very well be that, in some way, there was a certain abuse in the manner in which the pensioner handled his old age pension.
The party in question is 72. It is true that at that age, as at any other age, some people take a little more rope than they should. In this case, the man drinks a little and because there has been family trouble and reports have been made about him, he is deprived of the administration of his pension, even though he is quite lucid and has full control of his faculties. His old age pension is administered by the province.
I should not want to blame the federal or the provincial governments but I feel that, to a certain extent, the man should be allowed to present arguments against the government's contention if the latter withholds his pension because even if he is an alcoholic, I think that he is bright enough to look after his business. I know him personally.
This is just a minor detail, and I want to remind the minister that there are other more or less serious cases of this kind, which are sometimes left to the discretion of generally over zealous officials or of those who yield to sentiment. After all, we are all human.
As the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre did a moment ago I would like to urge the minister to raise the old age pension. I would also like to suggest that the old age pension be not increased in the same way as last year when legislation was passed to raise the pension and then a tax was introduced to meet the increase.
At that time Mr. Lesage was paying an additional $10; he, indeed, can do as he likes, but it happens that some pensioners in old people's homes, who were formerly getting $75, had their $10 withdrawn by Mr. Lesage, after the federal government added the same amount under the last amendment to the Old Age Pension Act, because the beneficiaries were in old people's homes. If Mr. Lesage

thought that it was logical to award them ten additional dollars before, I do not see why those senior citizens would not need them now.
Therefore, I would suggest to the minister that an agreement be entered into with the provincial governments, so that the minister or the provincial premiers who may have a tendency to act in such a way continue to give what money they were previously giving, because the person previously in need does not see the colour of the $10 given by the provincial government when the federal government decides to give an amount of $10 for the same purpose.
I find it strange that it is the federal government which levies taxes but it is the provincial government which benefits, because it was previously paying $10 to pensioners in homes for old people and the latter should therefore have received $85 but they only get $75.
And I should like to go farther. A few minutes ago the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre said that he had gone out on a limb and had the impression that he was going a little too far when as a young member he first came to the house he asked that old age pensions be raised from $20 to $30, while today he is asking for the abolition of the questionnaire which the 65 year old man must answer before he is allowed a pension.
I must congratulate him for the step he took several years ago and for pressing the government again today, because the $75 old age pension is less than the $20 pension of that time, if you consider the increase in the cost of living and what an individual needs today to survive.
It is hard to understand how a person can live on $75 a month especially at that age when people are physically deficient and more prone to illness, the body being less resistant than it was at 20. Doctors and druggists do not reduce their rates just because the customer is 75; on the contrary, some of them may take advantage of the situation because the scheme is administered haphazardly. So, half the pension goes to pay medical expenses and the recipient has only $38 or $40 left to live.
Mr. Chairman, it is certainly not unreasonable to ask for a pension increase; indeed, such a step would be even more fruitful if pensions started at the age of 60.
I understand the situation. In my area, that is in Thetford Mines and the vicinity, some 600 miners have been laid off. Many

of them are fathers of families and some of them have 10, 15 and 20 years of experience in the mines. A certain number of those men are 60 and, of course, they are still on the labour market, because they cannot get a pension from the mining company or from the federal government. Those who find work take the place of younger men who could otherwise start a career. Thus, the young people are just as worried as the older workers.
As far as I am concerned, I would be in favour of paying the pension at age 65 without any means test and that the test be compulsory in the case of recipients who have just turned 60. Very often a man of 60 who has worked in a mine for 20 years is ill and can no longer work. Needless to say that a 65-year old individual cannot live on a monthly pension of $75; he can barely exist on that.
I appreciate, as the minister said, that a lowering of the age required for the old age pension would give rise to additional expenditures. Very well, Mr. Chairman, and the same would apply in the case of family allowances; on the other hand, such expenditures would be worth while.
Mr. Chairman, if the intention is to pay an old age pension like the last one when the $10 increase was offset by a new tax, I would not approve of it, because the children would have to support their parents.
If the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has been called a demagogue, a few years ago, for asking that the old age pension be increased by $10, I am taking the chance of being called a demagogue for suggesting to the minister to draw the necessary funds from the Bank of Canada in order to finance consumer credit. And, at this point, I would suggest to the minister to kindly pay special attention to my remarks: she must use the Bank of Canada to finance consumer credit and that without interest; as far as credit granted to production, it is all right, because the selling price includes production costs as well as the interest paid to the bank by private enterprise, but consumer credit should not bear any interest.
This is where I ask the minister to look to the Bank of Canada to provide that money without interest, so that old age pensions and family allowances could be raised and that additional money, put in the hands of consumers, could circulate and also cause goods to circulate. Such money, in the long run, would return to its natural source and get back to the Bank of Canada. But, while in
Supply-Health and Welfare circulation, what would it make possible? Everything hinges on the consumption of goods, and do not forget that money merely represents goods, their legal tender. Instead of bartering a quarter of pork for a dozen of eggs, a monetary unit was established which we now use.
Mr. Chairman, it is quite all right for the government to control its own business, but it should finance consumer credit through the Bank of Canada. Whether it is called old age pension or national dividend, it does not matter; but let us face the facts with regard to the existing production and also consider that by meeting the existing natural needs, the national credit will only be improved in relation to the country's requirements. The same situation would prevail regarding family allowances.
I wish to point out to the minister that a survey was conducted in France following an increase in family allowances paid in relation to the number of children-I think the minister could inquire personally about this. It was established in France that family quarrels and divorces were considerably reduced when those various increases came into force. The trouble had been caused by the fact that the head of a family, being out of a job, had been unable to meet his family's needs. It was inevitable that after a certain period, some tension developed within the family, giving rise to quarrels, divorces and forcing public welfare organizations to take charge of the children. Finally, the state had to handle the problem and provide assistance just the same.
If the father and mother do not work, their children need food, clothing and shelter just the same, which means that the state has to provide for them. At one time the state gave a larger share of its revenue to the family itself so that, in turn, the latter would look after its own needs. That is how some kind of order was restored in French homes.
If the father was out of work, he had at least an income that enabled him to feed his children and, consequently, the mother might have had less reason to criticize the father, although he might not have been to blame for not working.
The same situation is found here. As a member of parliament and representative of the families in my riding, I am in a position to know that some of our citizens are faced with the same problem. As a matter of fact, when they come to me with their problems that might disrupt the family, I always discover, if I dig far enough, that financial difficulties are

Supply-Health and Welfare at the root of everything in 99 cases out of 100. Besides, they come to me for financial help. And that is true on a nation-wide basis.
That is why I ask the Minister of National Health and Welfare to be kind enough to consider the possibility of increasing old age pensions in order to ensure at least sufficient security to those who worked for years towards our country's progress and development in all fields.
I point out to the minister that it would be normal for those older people to stop worrying about the future and enjoy a measure of security. All their life, they were concerned about the future of their country and of their children, because the children represent the future of the nation. Consequently, it seems to me that it rests with us today to take up the challenge and help them a little, so that they can go through the last years of their life in peace, satisfied that they played their part and confident that the present generation will carry on their effort.
I also ask the minister to consider seriously helping large families through higher family allowances, because the welfare and security that can be extended today to those children will precisely promote the prosperity of this country in economic, social and cultural fields.
Indeed, it rests with us today to help those children who perhaps will be in a position to help us tomorrow.


Mr. Choquetie:: Mr. Chairman, I congratulate the minister for the wonderful task she is doing, but at the same time I also want to take a minute to call to her attention a proposal which was submitted to the authorities by the Societe des jeux d'hiver de Quebec which I understand was set up two years ago.
The president of that organization came to Ottawa and I had the great honour to introduce him to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Miss LaMarsh) so that he could set out the program that his group wanted to undertake.
Mr. Chairman, hon. members probably remember that the national sport council recommended a grant to that organization to make possible the organization of winter sports in Quebec city in 1966. Perhaps now the year 1966 would be too soon, and there would be reason to postpone this undertaking to 1967, which might coincide with the celebration of the confederation centennial.
I would see in this proposal a real factor of unity, since all our Canadian athletes might get together and co-operate in Quebec city on the occasion of sport competitions which would create great interest and make the
[Mr. Langlois.)

celebration of the centennial richer and more attractive.
Consequently, I call once more the attention of the minister to this fact, and perhaps she might give some details in informing the house on the negotiations in respect to this undertaking. Perhaps the minister would be kind enough to tell us whether those negotiations can be successful and are likely to result in an agreement, for I sincerely wish that this wonderful undertaking will be possible in Quebec city.


Barry Mather: 
[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Herman Maxwell Batten: This completes the estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare. The committee will now proceed to the consideration of the estimates of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys.



DEPARTMENT OP MINES AND TECHNICAL SURVEYS

[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration, including the administration of the Explosives Act and Canada's fee for membership in the pan-American institute of geography and history, $2,191,000.
Hon. W. M. Benidickson (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity, as I appreciated the

opportunity given to me last session, to report on the activities of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. I speak before this assembly very humbly, because in large part the work of this department is of a technical and professional nature. I found there were some 300 employees who had doctorates from various universities in technical and specialized fields. I want to assure this assembly that it has been a delight to me, representing parliament and the people of Canada, to be the head of this department because I have found the greatest respect for our wishes and desires on the part of the officials. At all times they really wish to follow the wishes of our democratic parliament despite then-great skills and technical knowledge.
The department is known as the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys but as I have travelled throughout the country since assuming office I have found myself generally referred to as the minister of mines. I want to assure my colleagues I have learned I am not the minister of mines. Indeed only about a quarter of our staff is devoted to the mining industry. If one looks at the government telephone directory, as I did after being appointed to office, he will readily recognize that the mines branch represents approximately only a quarter of the administrative duties and only a quarter of the personnel in this department, engaged on our behalf to serve the people of Canada.
In addition to the mines branch therefore there are many other aspects and branches that deserve the attention of the committee in examining the estimates of the department. So far as the over-all estimates are concerned, I think this department was one of the few that did not come before the house last year with supplementary estimates. I cannot say we will maintain that record in the coming year. We have one or two projects that we think cannot be deferred and we may come forward with supplementary estimates later in the year. If hon. members will examine the estimates for 1964-65, compare them with 1963-64 and keep in mind the necessary increases, particularly in salaries, I think they will find that the changes in our requests to the committee of supply this year are very modest indeed.
I am also responsible for reporting to parliament for the dominion coal board, whose estimates hon. members will find on page 228. There is no change in policy there. It is simply a matter of estimating the amount of tonnage that will move forward under the statutory approval of parliament already given.
7913
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
Perhaps I might summarize very briefly some of the activities that have gone on since I last reported to the committee of supply. I have said that I inherited from the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue a fairly tidy shop. I think he will agree with me that the department is not a very controversial one at any time, but rather a most worthy department and one that I think has served Canada very well.
I have just returned from a visit to Alberta where I attended the 21st annual conference of mines ministers of the various provinces. For a while they felt they should meet solely at the provincial level, but for the last three days they have allowed federal representatives to attend on an observer basis. My predecessor as minister, the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue, was the first federal representative invited to attend. I think progress is evident here. There were 400 representatives in attendance at the conference in Alberta. It has grown from a meeting of provincial mines ministers, their deputies and officials to the extent that representatives of industry and others connected with both provincial and federal governments are now attending in very broad measure, and I think to mutual advantage.
The value of mineral production in Canada is perhaps not always recognized but it is now at the level of about $3 billion a year. Consequently there is a growing demand for scientific investigation covering all steps in the extraction, use and marketing of minerals and their derivatives. Our department contributes very substantially to this end. In some other phases of our work, particularly surveying and field explorations, there have been advances and innovations in work methods and instruments which I think should be reported to the house, because while in the initial stage the apparatus and machinery involved are expensive they have resulted in the end in an efficiency which I think is very much appreciated by those concerned.
Members of the house have not had the opportunity of seeing, as it has been my privilege to see as the new minister, the work being done by the department in the remote Arctic. I give as an example the polar continental shelf project carried on by the department, which is now in its fifth year. It covers land, sea and sea bottom with closely spaced hydrographic, geological, gravimetric, seismic, geomagnetic, glaciologieal and topographical tests and surveys. This empha-
7914	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys sizes the department's special content of scientists and specialists who advise us in these matters.
In presiding over the department I take special pride in the recognition that has been accorded to our Canadian experts in all of the specialized fields. In travelling abroad they have been recognized as being very superior, earnest and knowledgeable, and we can take pride that in my department we have presidents of world wide organizations in practically all of these fields.
The surveys and mapping branch helped to open new vistas in surveying by co-sponsoring a seminar on air photo interpretation and by placing generally more emphasis on air photography in mapping. I think Canada is pre-eminent in this field. Then the aerodist, a recently developed airborne device for electronic distance measurement, was used successfully over land and sea. This device has been used a great deal by our department since we last reported to you and has deserved the reputation it has achieved. It has not only enabled surveyors to shorten work in difficult terrain from years to weeks, but it has provided also the first absolutely accurate measurements beyond the bounds of sight, such as between Sable island and the mainland of Nova Scotia. Within the last year it has been of immeasurable value in 40,000 square miles of terrain in northern Ontario and Quebec above the Canadian National Railway line.
Now, in the marine sciences, oceanographic research continued to expand and strengthen, and new marine investigations were started in the fields of geophysics, sea ice, theoretical studies and predictions. The new Bedford institute of oceanography, which I had the honour of opening last year late in 1963, operated at high pitch and began to attract international interest and acclaim. There was further integration of oceanographic and hydrographic work. Little attention was given in this house to an announcement which I had the pleasure of making after our oceanographic ship got into operation, namely the discovery of some anomalies in the ocean eastward from Nova Scotia. I believe these discoveries might be of some interest eventually to this country in the petroleum field.
Again, in this department we have the geological branch. The geological survey continued to press its mapping of Canada at reconnaissance scale, and 65 per cent of the entire country has now been covered by geological maps at scales no smaller than one inch to eight miles. This might not seem to


be impressive, but our country is very big. A notable development in recent years has been special laboratory investigations of fundamental geological processes undertaken by a small but growing staff, along with the development of techniques and equipment.
I come now to the mines branch. Among the outstanding activities of the mines branch since we last reported to you has been pilot plant tests on petroleum refining. There was great interest in this at the Banff ministers conference to which I referred earlier. These tests have been conducted with special attention paid to low grade oils and tar sands, the use of radiotracers, and so on. Every member in this house knows about the potential of the tar sands of Athabasca. We have in Ottawa a test plant that has been doing these studies and which has contributed to the successful development of a method of extracting enough vanadium from petroleum to supply the entire Canadian demand.
Then I should like to refer to the scientists from the geographical branch of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. They have continued to study land and ice forms and ancient plant remnants in the Arctic, to obtain a better picture of the geographical history of that remote portion of Canada. I want to refer also and pay tribute to the administration, personnel and information branches of the department. These, perhaps, are ancillary activities that do not receive the prominence some of the other branches of our department do. I want to say that I, personally, representing this house, perhaps see them most often and I view them, on your behalf and on behalf of the Canadian people, as interpreters, but I have to use my own sense in connection with the advice and programs that are advanced by these scientists. I thank the committee for their attention.


Mr. Martineau:: 
William Moore Benidickson: In fairness I think I should have said that it was the launching of the C.S.S. Hudson I attended, and this of course is an adjunct to the oceanographic institute.


Paul Raymond Martineau: I thank the minister for the rectification he has just made. The Hudson is indeed an adjunct to the institute of oceanography and it has been described as a floating laboratory. I would point out that its construction took place during the years we were in power, but it was finally inaugurated into service by the minister. This was a most important event in the history of marine science in this country, and I do not believe it was given sufficient prominence either in this chamber or in the press generally, because the facilities afforded by this ship will significantly increase the capabilities of our oceanography and hydrographic services.
The pool of very specialized, competent officials and trained scientific personnel that the department controls should be used in a broader way, and I believe the government should give serious consideration to coordinating the many research services carried on by many different departments. Huge sums of money are being spent on research, but to my mind there is not sufficient co-ordination, and the maximum yield is therefore not being extracted from the research done. The minister would be well advised to investigate the possibility of amalgamating all these research sciences and services under his own department, perhaps to form a new department, be it the department of research, or some other suitable name. It will have to come to that if Canada is not to lose the race entirely in the field of industrial and scientific research.
^ congratulate the minister on the work he is doing. Being in charge of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys is a little different from being in charge of any other department, because the minister is continually dealing with people who possess immensely more technical knowledge than he himself generally has. This may place him under a certain handicap but I do not think it is a real handicap. The minister should draw upon that personnel and ask them to use their imaginative talents to the utmost, in order that the great expansion of the department which was launched in the years of our administration will be carried forward into a new era of real expansion and new projects of great significance. Therefore I urge the minister to consider the establishment of a select committee to consider plan-

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys ning. Probably this is being done, but more emphasis should be given to planning a new program of real expansion, a program that is needed more now than ever before in the history of our country.
As the minister said, the mines branch of his department is the one best known by the public at large, and the minister himself is generally referred to as the minister of mines. It is gratifying to note that mineral production in this country has continued to expand- that it has expanded probably at a rhythm in excess of that enjoyed by most other mineral producing countries since the end of the second world war. Production has now reached a value of around $3 billion. This is a staggering amount of money and, indeed, it represents a significant fraction of our total gross national product. It is obvious therefore that the efforts of the minister and his department should be directed toward sustaining and further increasing the output of this industry.
Although its output is increasing, the mining industry is faced with serious problems. One of these concerns the efficient recovery of minerals from low grade deposits. Most of our great producing mines have been in existence for many years. Some of the largest have been forced to close down within recent years because of the lack of reserves. Instead of mining the high grade stuff, the industry now must spend greater sums of money and exert more ingenious efforts in order to extract sufficient pay dirt to make its activities profitable. This has created a host of problems which must be faced by the industry, and this is where the mines branch has a definite duty to perform by showing the greatest possible degree of imagination in assisting an industry which is of paramount importance to our prosperity.
There is also the problem presented by the increased competition which faces the mining industry in Canada. Though the state of our industry continues to be good, competition at the international level is constantly increasing. The impact of trading conditions is made clear when one remembers that three fifths of the total output of our mines is exported to other countries. It is therefore most necessary that the department, and not only the department but the government as a whole, should make every effort to extend to our mining industry all the assistance possible. I know the pegging of the dollar at 92J cents two years ago has helped to keep our mining industry alive. I do not think many of our producers would be in business today had it not been for the fixing
[Mr. Martineau.l
of the dollar at 92J cents. There was a dire need for such action in many fields, but nowhere more than in the mining field. Fortunately, this step was taken by the previous administration and I was reassured last week when the Acting Minister of Finance, the Minister of Trade and Commerce, told the house that the present exchange rate of the dollar was satisfactory and the government had no intention of changing it. I think this was reassuring news to our export industry, particularly to the mining industry.
But there are other ways in which the government and, in particular, the bureau of mines, could help the mining industry. One suggestion is that teams of experts be sent to the producers to work right in with the miners, the superintendents and the mining captains to help them become more efficient.
I was talking not long ago with a mining engineer of very extensive experience in industrial and mining engineering. I was astounded to hear him say that probably not more than 10 per cent of our mines were operating in a really efficient manner. I do not think he meant they were necessarily inefficient. He probably meant that with increased aid they could operate much more efficiently. Such assistance would produce immeasurable benefit, in my opinion, for the industry itself, for the workers and for the mining communities in general. These teams should be organized by the bureau of mines, trained, and sent right out to the centres of production. Let them go where gold and other metals are produced. Let them pay attention to work studies. Let them show the producers how to make the utmost use of human and material resources as well as greater use of the science known as industrial engineering.
Some industries, including some mines, have made intensive use of the new techniques and as a result have achieved savings which in the case of the larger firms have been most substantial. One firm, Stelco, for example, made savings amounting to as much as $5 million in one year. This was the result of greater supervision of production processes. My point is that it is one of the prime duties of the mines branch to encourage the producers to make use of modern methods, and that the branch should go in and train producers in the use of these methods. This would probably be an innovation, though I know there has been some contact between the mines bureau and the producers in the past, especially in the gold mining industry. However, I feel there is room for improvement and that these contacts could be intensified.

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
I would also urge the minister and, through him, the government to give greater aid to those at the grass roots level, if I may use that expression, of the mining industry. I am thinking of the prospectors. There are still great mineral discoveries to be made in this land as has been shown most vividly in the last few months in the Timmins area, for example. We have seen how prospectors, working very often without assistance and with the most rudimentary means, have been able to find great deposits. The amazing thing is that these deposits are often found close to existing mines. One might imagine that such areas, which are known as mineral producing areas, would have been well explored, prospected and analysed in every way. If there were any mineral veins lurking around the subsoil in that area they would have long ago been discovered, but this has not been the case, as experience shows every day.
The real glamour of the mining industry is vested in the prospector, he is the man who does not fear to face great physical hardship, who goes out into the wild and rugged sectors which abound in our land, and who very often by sheer determination and faith in his lucky star will hit the jackpot, as it is commonly put. As a result a new mine may be established. I think the government should bend itself to consider the needs of such a person who is so important to the over-all saga of mining in Canada. Let the minister be able to provide facilities for loans or subsidies to the prospector to enable him to get the technical and scientific gear and equipment necessary to carry on his trade. He is not helped enough by the government, and special facilities should be provided him. I urge the government to give serious consideration to assistance of this sort which I am sure would mean very little in terms of the fiscal position of the government, but which might result in much increased prospecting activity throughout Canada, and therefore greater discoveries at a time when new discoveries are urgently needed by the mining industry. As I stated a few minutes ago, deposits are getting lower, the grade of ore is getting lower, and more difficulty is being encountered in obtaining deposits than before.
Another way in which the government could help the mining industry would be in considering the elimination of the tax on production and equipment machinery. It is no exaggeration to say that that tax has virtually crippled, in many cases, small
marginally producing mines. It has, of course, considerably impaired the competitive position of these mines and it would seem that there is no real fiscal justification for a tax of that nature which attacks, as it does, the very things which lead to increased production in the country. At a time when the Minister of Finance is continually speaking of the need for that type of expansion, why should that tax remain? In addition, the way it has been applied should be closely considered by the minister. The minister was himself the former and very brilliant and able financial critic of his party and I am sure his counsel would have more than just passing influence at the decision making or policy making level. I think he should make urgent representations in this regard to his colleague, the Minister of Finance.
I realize that the minister has received briefs from the metal mining association and others which have in a very lucid way set out the difficulties which the tax has caused, and to my mind caused unfairly. Therefore I am sure that the minister, who really has his heart in the right place, is going to exert every possible effort to see that this situation is corrected. At the same time, he being, as I know he is, an expert on the different financial and taxation statutes on the books, he should look into some of the sections of the Excise Tax Act, because some clarification is needed there. I am told that the way some sections are being interpreted does not permit the mining companies to qualify for the exemption provided on materials which are used directly in the productive processes. These materials are normally exempted, yet by some bureaucratic technique, about the finer subtleties of which I confess I am ignorant, these companies cannot or do not seem to be able to obtain this exemption. Therefore, new mining ventures are often not pursued, which results in a loss to the mining industry and the gross national product, a loss of revenue all round and also of employment opportunities.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, may I say that I have spoken to the officials in front of me and we will make representations to the minister again.


Paul Raymond Martineau: I realize the minister is aware of the problem, but by stressing it probably some action will result. I know this action is much hoped for by the mining industry.
I was happy to see that the cost aid program has been extended with some modifi-

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys cations. This has helped the industry a great deal and has given it the stability it needs. But, of course, it is far from being the answer to many of its problems; it is only a stopgap measure.
Last year I spoke of the necessity for a revision in the world price for gold. Like most people, doubtless the minister himself feels that the present price is not at all realistic. It is artificially held, yet it seems to work against the very people who maintain the price. The gold reserves of the United States government have dropped drastically in recent years and have reached a point that is critical. In fact, the gold reserves of the United States are today not much more than that which is required to guarantee the currency. This situation is the complete reverse of the situation which existed 10 or 15 years ago. The reason for this is that world supplies and resources of gold are dwindling. Gold has also been hoarded, I believe, by other powers. Yet the governments of the western world seem to stand idly by and let the situation go from bad to worse. Canada has a certain voice in the control of the international monetary fund and in world councils, and although I know the United States has at times expressed its disfavour of the idea I think that pressure should be applied, inasmuch as pressure can be applied, to see that there is a revision in that price. If there were, I think a period of great prosperity for our gold industry and our mining industries in general would follow.
These are about the only remarks I have to make at this time, Mr. Chairman. I wish to conclude, and to congratulate once again the minister and all of his officials from the deputy minister down who are performing such a fine job. The department constitutes a very unique and extraordinarily marvellous tool for progress, for research and for greater prosperity not only in the mining industry but in many other industries.
Great imagination should be used in order that this tool can be completely used, resulting in a full yield drawn from that great reservoir of trained scientific personnel. There should be no fear of innovation; indeed innovation should be the new watchword of the department. If that is the attitude adopted, and I think it will be, we can expect great things from the minister and his department, which will benefit us all.


Mr. Pugh:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few remarks about these estimates. I am glad to welcome the minister, and in

view of the subject I wish to discuss, perhaps I should have addressed him as the minister of telescopes.
There is a radio telescope located on high ground in the Okanagan valley near Penticton and Oliver, fulfilling the role for which it was constructed. I understand plans are in existence for the construction of an optical telescope somewhere in the British Columbia mountains, and I should like the minister to give us the latest information available in this regard. Naturally I favour the location of such a telescope in the Okanagan area, and I do so for a great many reasons. The minister and his departmental officials have travelled through this area and given very thorough consideration to the location of a site for such a contemplated telescope, and I hope that nothing will be done to impede this research. I think this is a very wonderful project, one which could very appropriately be associated with the centennial of confederation.
Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to take up too much time dealing with this subject, but I should like to point out that there are many desirable locations in the Okanagan area. Such a telescope could be constructed at almost any desirable altitude in an area having all the necessary elements to the successful operation of such an instrument. There seems to be some good argument for locating this instrument in close proximity to the radio telescope now located in that area. Many advantages would be gained by such a location, particularly on the administrative side. I am sure that following the establishment of such a telescope there would be a number of technical men moving to the area, and I might say that British Columbia would more than welcome those people to this area. The individuals who live there now as a result of the estabishment of the radio telescope I am sure enjoy the effervescence of the climate. I believe the radio telescope operates more efficiently in that area than perhaps it would anywhere else. In that area there is very little interference in the way of noise or pollution from industry, which would spoil the situation.
Perhaps I should also mention the fact that whenever a project of this kind is undertaken it has been a tourist attraction. While I do not suggest the telescope should be located there to give a boost to the tourist industry, there would be an added advantage in this way. Perhaps I should repeat that in the Okanagan area such an instrument could be located at almost any altitude that

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
was desired, in an area isolated but easily accessible. I am sure I speak fairly for the people of the Okanagan area when I say they would welcome the establishment of such a telescope there. I hope the minister will give us some information in this regard before his estimates are passed.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, I do not think I have received more correspondence from members of this house about any subject within my purview than I have about the construction and location of this large optical telescope of advanced design which, when constructed, will put Canada in a very up to date position in comparison with other countries of the world. We in this department feel that the establishment of such a telescope would be an appropriate project to honour the centennial of our confederation. There are so many members of parliament from that area where the telescope will probably be located, according to advice from my officials, who have communicated with me, that in my remarks I may overlook some of their names and suggestions. However, I should like to point out that certainly the last speaker, the hon. member for Okanagan Boundary, has discussed with me the desirability of his area as a location, as have the hon. members for Kamloops, Kootenay East, Okanagan-Revel-stoke and others. I can assure them all that our plans have not advanced beyond our thinking that nothing more wonderful could be done by our department to celebrate the centennial than the construction of this telescope. The final proposition has not gone to treasury board, let alone to the cabinet, and I can assure hon. members that this is such an important technical project it would probably necessitate the expenditure of something between $9 million and $10 million, and once constructed would be one of the two or three of the greatest existing in the world today. I can assure hon. members of this committee, particularly the seven, eight or ten who have indicated their interest in a location for this telescope, that if I am the minister at the time the site is chosen, it will be chosen on a strictly technical basis as the best possible location, so that Canada can move forward and maintain its longtime position in this scientific field.


David Vaughan Pugh: Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to hear the minister say that the final decision as to the location will be made on a technical basis, and I am sure that regardless of where this telescope is located in British Columbia, no one in the interior will point a finger at
the government and suggest favouritism, because they are aware of the great number of exceptionally well qualified men in his department.
I do not think the telescope would ever be put in an improper place, and probably this would be the best place in the end. I was pleased with the minister's statement that this would be a rather wonderful centennial project. Of course it would. Compared with all the ideas for smaller projects that have been put forward, I feel it is of such importance and is such a magnificent venture that it should be brought to fulfilment. I hope the minister will press his colleagues strongly in this regard because every dollar spent on a project of this type will mean a return in human interest and keeping our country abreast of the times in this field. I do not think any other project can compare.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, I can assure the hon. member that this project has really touched my interest very much since it was presented by the research people of the department. I think a large optical telescope would be something that would make Canada pre-eminent in this field for quite a long time after our centennial in 1967. But I would point out to all members that some of the technical features are elevation, access roads, community settlement and a requirement for a dry and relatively clear climate in an area which has a record of lack of turbulence of any kind in the atmosphere. The scientists are considering these matters. To those who have spoken to me about this project in the knowledge that it would be a unique asset to their particular regions I have pointed out these factors. We have a general idea that the proper place is somewhere in western Alberta or British Columbia, but until we get an indication that this particularly large expenditure will be approved by the government no commitment can be made. However, I have assured everybody who has written me that our technical people certainly will visit each and every area that has been suggested.


Mr. MacEwan:: Mr. Chairman, I have a few brief remarks to make on these estimates. I travelled to Sudbury during the past year in a party of 30 members of the House of Commons. For the record may I say that the trip was made at no cost to the taxpayers of Canada. It was organized by the amiable member for Sudbury. The Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys and the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources accompanied us. As a result of the camaraderie

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys which developed on the trip we made a sort of bargain with the minister that we would not be too tough on his estimates, but I think we should have our say at this time.
At that time we visited the Frood-Stobie mine of the International Nickel Company. I come from an area where coal mining is the most important industry, and having worked in coal mines during the summer, having lived in a coal mining town, having associated with coal miners and my people having been coal miners all their lives, my eyes were certainly opened by this visit to a hardrock mine. Electric lighting is something you do not see in a coal mine and the visit certainly was a revelation to me. If such trips can be organized at no cost to the taxpayers I think they would be of great advantage to members of the house in learning what goes on in various Canadian industries.
Mention was made of the Bedford hydrographic institute by the former minister, and also the shipbuilding program which I understand is being carried out. This program was inaugurated by the former government and I congratulate the minister on continuing it. Hydrography and oceanography are of great importance today in the development of our country. We know that many matters of national importance come under this department, and only through the carrying out of surveys and research can we hope to develop our great country. I congratulate the minister on his work in this regard and I hope he will continue. It is most important to our country.
A matter more on the domestic side, shall I say, was raised by the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg. It is dealt with in the answer to question No. 1,646 to be found on page 7569 of Hansard. It has to do with the wage scale for employees of the minister's department, and employees on certain ships of the Department of Transport. It is pointed out in the answer that by placing all employees of the Department of Transport on the same wage rates the department has more flexibility in moving crews from one vessel to another which would allow for better career planning. The answer continues:
The effects of this exception on wage rates applicable to personnel serving on Department of Mines and Technical Surveys vessels operating in the same area as vessels of the Department of Transport are presently under consideration with a view to eliminating any resultant unwarranted differences in rates.
I suggest to the minister that this is good. I have had representations in this regard, as has the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg and probably other members as well.

I hope treasury board will make an exception, as it seems to me the words used with regard to personnel on Department of Transport ships would apply equally to personnel on ships of the minister's department, in that there would be more flexibility in moving crews from one vessel to the other which would allow for better career planning.
I wish to refer to another matter which actually comes under the estimates of the northern affairs department but certainly has a lot to do with coal mining and the minister's department. I refer to the Atlantic Provinces Power Development Act under which subventions were inaugurated by the former government that are payable to commercial users of power in the Atlantic area using power generated from thermal plants utilizing coal. At the end of the year they receive a cheque by way of subvention which cuts down their power costs and means a great deal to them. Certainly there has been no intimation of any change in this policy, which is most important to the Atlantic area. In my area there is a thermal plant at Trenton which provides power for the region and is also linked by grid with the province of New Brunswick. When New Brunswick has been short of power that thermal plant has supplied power to that province. This has been most beneficial and I hope this policy will be continued.
The heavy water plant in the constituency of the hon. member for Cape Breton South for which tenders have been called will also provide a market for Cape Breton coal. At one point the Minister of Industry said the plant would be there, and then he was not quite sure. B.A. Oil then came forward with a submission allegedly involving a lesser cost for the production of heavy water, but apparently upon investigation this was found not to be the case. The plan is going ahead. Industrial Estates, a Nova Scotia crown corporation, has played and is playing a great part in the financing and establishing of this heavy water plant.
In this regard it should also be noted that the new atomic power plant to be built in Ontario will provide a market for the heavy water produced by the plant in Nova Scotia, The Minister of Industry referred to it in a statement he made in the house not too long ago. During the last few weeks I have had conversations with the engineer from the Nova Scotia power commission who has been assigned to act as liaison officer with Deuterium of Canada Limited, the company which is constructing the heavy water plant. He told me they were very happy to see that

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
' this plant was being proceeded with in Ontario because it would provide even more markets for this heavy water plant than had been anticipated originally.
There is a matter which disturbs us a little bit, and it was referred to some time ago by the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria. It is a statement made at the conference which was attended by the minister. This statement was made by a member of the dominion coal board, Mr. Whittaker. The hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria asked the Prime Minister whether or not Mr. Whittaker, the managing director of the coal operators association of Canada, was stating government policy when he called on coal transportation officials to work for the eventual elimination of the federal subvention on coal transportation. This subvention on coal transportation is most important to the maritime provinces, especially in the Cape Breton area where much coal is produced which is marketed here in Ontario. It is sold to the Ontario hydro commission. In fact, as hon. members probably know, one large ship has been constructed, the S.S. Cape Breton I believe, which has been used to transport coal, and another ship is now being constructed to carry on this trade. These subventions are necessary and must be continued in order to assist this area. Any suggestion by a member of the dominion coal board that they be eliminated would, I hope, not be considered by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister did say, in reply to the hon. member's question, that this statement did not reflect government policy but he would be glad to look into the matter at once. Let us hope that this member of the dominion coal board, who has a great deal to say about matters pertaining to coal in Canada, will not prevail upon the government. Of course the coal board has to go to the government before there is any change in policy, so let us hope there will be no change in this regard.
There is a final matter which I should like to bring to the attention of the minister. It has been brought forward annually ever since 1957, when I became a member. As the officials will know, and as succeeding officials have become aware, I refer to the oceanographic ship Acadia. This ship has been put up for a long time in the port of Pictou, in my constituency. Each year about this time a question arises as to whether or not the Acadia will be based there for the winter. I believe this subject bears repetition so I will put on the record the fact that this 20220-502
ship means a great deal to the Pictou area, not only to the town but the whole area. It means much to the shipyards in the way of refitting and repairs, and means much to the local merchants. Many of the crew members, of course, have their houses in this community and their children go to school there. This is a matter of great importance to them.
My final point in this regard is that Pictou is in a designated area. It comes under the New Glasgow employment office. Certainly when an area is designated, that does not mean that the present industries-this ship represents an industry-will be moved out of the area. Certainly the Minister of Industry should be interested in this matter. I remind the minister that the former minister, the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue, made provision that the ship should remain there, as did the present minister last year. It has been stated that since the oceanographic institute is at Bedford, the Acadia should remain there. However, it is a small ship and it does not operate in winter. It means a great deal to the Pictou area, so I urge the minister that this ship be retained there.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, may I just point out that we have a Nova Scotian minister, the Minister of Labour. This department, and particularly the branch relating to coal mining, is most important to the Atlantic area. Let us hope that the minister of this department will consult with the minister from Nova Scotia on all matters so important to the Atlantic area, especially those relating to coal mining and subventions on coal transportation. Let us hope that they, in turn, will prevail upon the Minister of Finance, who is from another province, that the Atlantic area is also a part of Canada and is important. Let these ministers be heard in the cabinet, and let them speak on behalf of the economy of the Atlantic area.


Mr. Fisher:: I will try to be succinct in my remarks relating to this department. The only question of an over-all nature that I wanted to raise was the suggestion that the government should be considering looking at every department to see whether or not it is necessary for them to have ministerial status any longer. This Department of Mines and Technical Surveys it seems to me is so little in the political centre of things, the partisan centre of things, that I believe it would be feasible to eliminate it. I certainly think we should have a report on this question. It is in the main a scientific and research or-
7922	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys ganization, and since we now have both a Department of Trade and Commerce and a Department of Industry to look after the promotional aspects and trade aspects in this field, I wonder whether it is not time to consider putting the various agencies that come under this department in the Department of Industry, thus enabling us to cut down.
I believe that in political terms it would be much more important to have two departments of transport, one dealing with air and the other with the other means of transport, than to have a Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. I say this without casting any reflections upon the gentlemen who have been ministers in recent years. It seems to me it is becoming more and more apparent, despite the growth of the mining industry, that in the main the federal role is very much restricted to science and research. It seems to me that the necessity for the continuation of this as a department of government with ministerial status has just about come to an end. I certainly think that mines, and the various departments which are like it such as the Department of Forestry and perhaps the Department of Fisheries, are such that we might consider abolishing them for ministerial status on the basis that all they are doing is providing a technical service. There is not enough work to occupy a minister. My point is that since it is in the main administrative, and is not very political or partisan, it could quite easily come under a senior civil servant and be set up as a branch of the Department of Industry.
I have examined the publications of the department, its technical services, and looked at the general activities and I am not convinced that they could not be handled by an agency or a branch of another department. I think we should be considering means of reducing the size and numbers in the cabinet, rather than increasing them. One of the reasons I have come to this view stems from the inadequacy of this department when we get into any situation such as the Timmins strike. This is the biggest strike in mining in recent years in Ontario, and we have had a great deal of confusion about just what it has to do with the responsibilities of the department. In effect it appears that if the department has any role in this kind of situation it would be very much at arm's length, in some kind of research activity, and even there it would not appear to be very much.
One of the most controversial questions in northern Ontario in relation to the Timmins strike is whether a smelter or refineries will

be built, where they will be located, what will be the situation in terms of economics, where the capital will come from, and what role the federal government or provincial government will play in the location. It is quite evident from the information given to me in the house, and apparent from the questions raised by the hon. member for Timiskaming and the hon. member for Timmins, that the department really has no major role to play in this whole matter. That is nothing to be ashamed of in connection with this particular case, but it reinforces the reality that this, as a department of government, has passed its time.
I think, just as the geographical survey was the first of the great administrative and investigating agencies developed in this country and has done a marvellous job, so this department is now just coasting on momentum, and it is time to raise the question as to whether we need the department any longer. This is no reflection on the research and other activities carried on in connection with the department. Dealing with the question of agencies, my friends in the maritimes and my friends in Alberta are aware there is a dominion coal board, but I have not been able to see that the minister really has any great role to play in connection with that agency, other than to make reports in the house and be some kind of intermediary.
There is one other point I want to raise with the minister, and again it reflects the lack of initiative and the prospect of modernity, if you want, in an extension of the activities of this department. I have raised with the minister the question of some kind of aid for prospectors. I know he will not mind my saying, I got a nice run-around from him, and an even nicer run-around from the provincial minister, Mr. Wardrope, who shares a constituency with me. Obviously the attitude of the federal government is, "Let us not get into something on which it is probably difficult to work out a good policy"; and so the minister is not prepared to move into this matter. The department has not got any interest in something like this that would open up opportunities for many little men, for people who live on the fringes-I am thinking of the geographical fringes-of our society, to get out and follow their interests.
No schools held in the last decade have had a higher ratio of interest than the prospectors schools held in Ontario. In almost every town that fringes on mineralized areas you find people going out, working, staking,

trying to capture their dream of finding something big. Very rarely do they go out with the kind of equipment that will lead to something great. Prospecting has become a function of very large companies that have good equipment. It may be just nostalgia on my part, but I think it would be a good idea to work out an arrangement to support prospectors. However, we get no leadership in this direction from the federal department and again the excuse seems to be put forward-"Why bother? This is really a provincial problem." Then when you take it to the provincial governments, aside from some interest in Saskatchewan and a little bit in B.C., they are prepared to let the thing go.
These examples it seems to me reinforce the question that I raised. Is it not time that we did away with this department, in so far as its having ministerial rating, and transfer the agencies, branches and survey groups within it under some minister who will look after all the scientific and research projects, and thus have real rationalization of government organization; or else it could be brought under the Department of Industry?
I would appreciate a reply in letter form from the minister on the last specific question I want to raise with him, which arises from questions I put previously in connection with prevailing rate employees who work for the department. A number of these employees with whom I have come in contact are unable to appreciate why they cannot be put on a permanent basis. The answer that was given to me-and I assume the information in the main came from the president of treasury board-was to the effect that this matter had been looked into and the government saw no reason to change its policy. I suppose the reason is that if these particular employees were given the kind of status they are seeking it would cause a ripple through the whole civil service. The argument put to me is that there are some unique features about the kind of work these people are doing in this department, that there is permanence in it, and because of this they think they are entitled to the kind of rights and privileges that accrue to a civil servant proper, and that prevailing rate employees do not have.
I would like the minister to write me a letter or memorandum setting out in greater detail the answers to these questions and what the prospects may be for changing this present relationship. I would also like a longer explanation than I have been given as to how the situation relates to prevailing rate employees in other departments.
7923
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys


Malcolm MacInnis: Realizing hon. members on both sides are anxious to get these estimates through, I shall be very brief. The questions posed by my colleague from Pictou will no doubt provide me with many of the answers I seek, but he mentioned the heavy water plant, and this brought to mind the sort of dilemma the people of Cape Breton found themselves in when the minister announced the plant would be placed in Nova Scotia, and then claimed no such announcement was ever made. Because of this many people in Glace Bay were referring to it, not as the heavy water plant but as the hot water plant.
In the minister's announcement it is quite evident that the phrase used, that this would provide a substantial market for Nova Scotia coal within Nova Scotia, pinpointed the plant for Nova Scotia, but the later contradictory announcement caused a great deal of concern in the mining areas.
As was referred to by the hon. member for Pictou, and by the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria on Tuesday last, Mr. Whittaker, a member of the coal board, made a statement in Banff recently to the effect that subsidies should be done away with. The Prime Minister has assured us that this is not government policy. Nevertheless it is an unhealthy situation when somebody in an influential position, such as Mr. Whittaker, suggests this, because if it were adopted as government policy it would be very detrimental to the welfare of Cape Breton and Nova Scotia as a whole.
This is not the first time such a statement has emanated from persons whose words would give us cause for great concern. I should like the minister, when replying to the original question put by the hon. member for Pictou, to assure the people in the mining areas of Nova Scotia that neither Mr. Whittaker's statement nor the statement made by the hon. member for Coast-Capilano have any authority to back them up. I may say that this hon. member, the parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister, has advocated such a move himself and this, as I say, has caused considerable concern.
We have had an outstanding example of co-operation by the department of northern affairs in helping to provide employment opportunities in my area. I would also ask that the department of mines, in co-operation with the Department of National Defence and the Department of Labour should work to find something in the way of alternative employment for the many miners who are

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys faced with idle times this winter and who have recently been laid off because of the single shift policy in the No. 18 colliery in my area. I think a good deal could be done in this direction, and the greater the number of government departments acting in cooperation to provide alternative employment possibilities, the better the chances will be of finding something concrete which will provide that employment. I have in mind such programs as were introduced by the previous government, in particular the fortress Louis-burg project. This was one of the recommendations of the Rand commission. I may say I never did agree with much of what was contained in that report, though I have possibly been proven wrong in connection with the development at Louisburg. This development will mean a great deal to our area in the future. It has been helpful in providing employment, and I hope the program will be accelerated so as possibly to help out some of those men recently displaced at the No. 18 colliery.
I trust the minister, in co-operation with his colleagues in other departments, will do everything he can to assist in the event of light industries coming in to build around the heavy water industry. I have in mind in particular a metal fabrication industry which is showing some interest in locating on Cape Breton. There are rumours it may establish a machine shop at the vacated naval base, and if that is the case I would ask the minister to give a helping hand if it is possible to establish that industry in the area. As I said, the Rand commission report never excited me and I did not agree with very much of what it contained. As for the statements which have been forthcoming from Mr. Whittaker and from the hon. member for Coast-Capi-lano, the people of Cape Breton and the mining areas of Nova Scotia generally find them most disturbing, particularly since the hon. member for Coast-Capilano is the parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister, and they want an assurance that such statements carry no weight whatsoever.
In addition to those statements, one other piece of information has come to my attention. It has to do with the recommendations of the Rand commission report. I questioned the minister about this shortly after he had returned from his trip to Cape Breton and I referred to the intention of some people, people in a position to act if the government accepted the policy, to implement the recommendation of the Rand commission referring to the reduction of production to three mil-

lion tons a year. Such a reduction if it were put into effect would mean, in my estimation, together with the loss of the second shift at one colliery, possibly the elimination of another colliery altogether, and it would be a blow which the area certainly could not take. I ask the minister to give us an assurance that such a recommendation would get no consideration whatsoever and that the government would turn a deaf ear to any such proposal, as it would to the suggestion concerning the subvention. I believe the department could contribute a great deal, in co-operation with other departments, to promoting alternative employment and it is my hope that any industry wishing to develop in the mining areas, whether associated directly with the heavy water plant now under way or not, will be assisted in every way possible by the hon. gentleman and his officials.


William Moore Benidickson: Since the hon. member for Cape Breton South and the hon. member for Pictou have both referred to a statement made by a member of the dominion coal board perhaps I should take this opportunity to reply to the point which has been raised. I will refer to the other matters later, in a general way.
May I say that on Wednesday I was in Alberta where I met the members of the coal board. At that time I had not seen the statement referred to; the board had met a week earlier at Lake Louise. But I did see Mr. Whittaker, and since returning to Ottawa I have seen the Canadian Press report which, I imagine, is the basis for the remarks of the hon. member for Cape Breton South. I have also noted the question which was raised on Tuesday by the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria, in reply to which the Prime Minister said that if Mr. Whittaker's remarks had been accurately quoted they were not an indication of government policy.
I completely agree. I do not think the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria was properly reporting what Mr. Whittaker said. It was obvious to me, at least, from Mr. Whittaker's remarks, that he was referring only to the western sales of coal under subvention, which hon. members know are all export items bearing no relation whatever to maritime producers. He was referring to 800,000 tons on which assistance is given by subvention, in the light of the far more substantial subventions applied to the production of eastern coal. Mr. Whittaker simply said that since the purchasers of this 800,000 tons of western coal were in Japan, the subvention

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
itself introduced an element of uncertainty in the minds of the buyers which induced them to prefer another source of coal, such as Australia. His suggestion was that since the factors which called for the subvention were transportation costs and, of course, costs at the mines themselves, efforts should be made to introduce new efficiency in production and to reduce the cost of transport from the coal mines of Alberta and British Columbia to Port Moody to an extent which would eventually, perhaps, eliminate the necessity of a subvention to compete with Australian supplies. He had no reference at all to the maritimes.


Malcolm MacInnis: I thank the minister for that reply but it does bring up another question. I might point out here that the Prime Minister did not use the word "if" in the answer he gave to the question asked by the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria. Now that the minister has taken care of Mr. Whittaker's statement, would he give us the assurance that the statement made by the hon. member for Coast-Capilano will also receive the same treatment from the government?


William Moore Benidickson: I have not seen the other statement. I felt that the colleague of the hon. member for Cape Breton South had not read the full text, as I have, of the Canadian Press dispatch with respect to Mr. Whittaker's statement so I should like to see the other statement before I comment on it.


Mr. Moreau:: Mr. Chairman, I had not intended to speak on these estimates until I heard the comments of the hon. member for Port Arthur in which he advocated virtually the elimination of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. It seemed to me he suggested that the activities of this department might be put into some other minor portfolio. I should like to make a few comments about that because I have rather the opposite view to that held by the hon. member for Port Arthur.
I should like to see the role of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys enlarged. Perhaps we are striving toward the same end but are just taking a different road to get there. Maybe the department should be renamed to something like the department of scientific services. I think the department of mines has played a unique role in Canada and perhaps we should take a lesson from the experience we have obtained in the mining field and apply the same principle to other industries in Canada. I refer to the
role of government in providing research facilities for industry.
I noted that the hon. member for Port Arthur lauded the role of the geological survey branch, and certainly this is a very important branch of the department which has played a major role in the development of Canadian mining. As the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue pointed out, this role is an increasing one and a very important one to our economy. I feel there is a considerable misunderstanding here-and perhaps the hon. member for Port Arthur was quite accurate when he said also a certain amount of nostalgia-in regard to mining prospecting. The so-called prospector is, in my opinion, very much a thing of the past in the mind of the public. We do have people on the fringes of our northern communities who indeed play an important role in mining, but I suggest that they are not really prospectors any more. They are really brokers in real estate who follow up on larger companies or syndicates which are better financed and which make a discovery somewhere. These people then try to grab real estate near some of these finds. Reference was made earlier to the Timmins strike, and I suggest this is a very good case in point. In my opinion, prospecting has changed very much in Canada. Perhaps we lead the world in our approach to mineral exploration, and in this case scientific methods and a very well financed program resulted in the discovery of a very important mineral resource in Canada.
The view of the prospector, the prospector about whom I understood the hon. member to be speaking, who is sent to a prospectors' school for six weeks and financed in a grubstake sort of way, is that this discovery could never have been made by a prospector, because it was a discovery which was not exposed in any way and could not have been discovered by the old methods used 20 years ago. I am not suggesting for a moment that mines will not be found by the direct visual method ever again, but I do think that in the last 20 years this method has been a diminishing factor in mineral exploration and will continue to become smaller and smaller. The role of a prospector as I see it today-and I include myself in this category-is one of more sophisticated and better technical and scientific support to a program, although I think-this sort of program is really beyond the scope of one individual, or even a small group of individuals.
As I have said, I should like to see the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys
7926	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys enlarged so as to include a scientific support role for industry in general. As I was saying earlier, we have had unique experience in the mining industry of how this could be made to work. I disagree very strongly with the hon. member for Port Arthur when he suggests that this department has really ceased to play an important role in this industry. We are increasingly faced with the problem of beneficiating lower and lower grade ores, as the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue pointed out. We are also faced with the problem of doing scientific research in Canada, which has certainly lagged and is a role we must increase. We know very little really about the earth's crust and the larger, broader scientific matters. I feel this is a very important and useful role and perhaps the emphasis of the department has shifted from one of cursory mapping-although this will continue to be an important part of the department's activities-to one of more detailed exploration and scientific examination, as well as developing new techniques in mining exploration through research, all of which is necessary if this country is to maintain the position it has achieved in the world.
I should like to see the department expanded in order to play a similar scientific support role to industry in general. I feel that with this very advanced technology into which we are running now, with the problem of automation and so on, the department could be playing a very important role. I hope the minister will be putting his sights in this direction and that the government will agree to the department's assuming the kind of role which I think it should be playing in industry generally.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, it is encouraging to see the number of members who are taking part in this discussion this afternoon. It has been characteristic of the consideration of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys estimates by the committee of the whole, that the consideration has in days gone by been rather cursory and hasty. I know there are good reasons for this fact, as the hon. member for Port Arthur intimated a moment ago. Perhaps the policy and political functions of this department are not as pressing as those of the other departments which come before this committee. I think there is also another explanation, Mr. Chairman, in the fact that the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys has operated in a very efficient fashion over the years. I do not think there


is another department of government that has established a reputation among the various aspects of the business community in Canada which would exceed the reputation of the department we now have under discussion.
It is customary to extend compliments to the men and women who are responsible for this happy state of affairs, and I join in those courtesies that have been extended by other members during this discussion. The department for many years had an outstanding deputy minister in the person of Dr. Marc Boyer who was succeeded by a man with the same qualities and qualifications, Dr. Van Steenburgh. I think these men have given the leadership to the department which has resulted in that high degree of efficiency that has been established.
Having emphasized the importance of this department I want to make some comments along the lines of those made by the hon. members for Port Arthur and York-Scarbo-rough. It is quite true that the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys and the mining industry occupy a vital place in Canada's economy, inasmuch as they are concerned with resources development and the wise management of both renewable and non-renewable resources are of utmost importance to the continued growth of Canadian economy. I have been looking through the very excellent reports circulated by the department from time to time in respect of various Canadian minerals, and it is interesting to note that the economic upsurge which began some four years ago in Canada was strongly based on the growing strength of the Canadian mineral industry. The improved balance of payments situation that has been noted by economists in Canada in the past few years again derives in great part from this upsurge in the Canadian mineral industry. I do not have the current figures, but in 1961 when I was more intimate with this department than I am at the present time, I think something like 40 per cent of Canada's total exports were derived from the mineral industry, and the order of priority in that balance of payments situation was minerals, wheat and tourism. I understand that order is still holding-minerals out front, wheat second and tourism in a very close third position in the important role of improving Canada's balance of payments situation.
The economic upsurge which began some four years ago was stimulated and encouraged by a deliberate attempt to stabi-

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
lize the Canadian dollar, beginning in June of 1961 when the stabilization fund was used to lower the value of the Canadian dollar in relation to the United States dollar. This was part of a deliberate program and policy to encourage industries that were already playing a major role in Canadian economic life.
I should pay a compliment as well to the role the officials of this department played in the successful trade crusades which took place during those years, in providing personnel with the necessary technical skills and knowledge needed to take the message to those nations around the world which were contacted during those very useful and successful trade crusades efforts.
All these achievements were brought about in the face of stiffening world competition. It is a well known fact that in respect of a good many basic minerals there is a glut on the world market at present. The fact that Canada was able to improve its position is of great credit to the dedicated men and women who served in this department.
Various members from different parts of Canada have spoken this afternoon in recognition of the importance to the total Canadian economy of the mining industry, not only in respect of mining itself but also in respect of subsidiary benefits. As a westerner from the prairies I am conscious of the impact of the opening of the Thompson nickel mine in northern Manitoba on the total economy of the province of Manitoba. That mine opened in 1961 and is gradually prospering, broadening the economic picture of that province. The development of potash in Saskatchewan is having the same effect, and we are all aware of the petroleum development in Alberta which has enriched the economy of that province beyond all expectations. The development of asbestos in Quebec and Newfoundland are, of course, playing similar roles there. I think I should pay tribute as well to the industry itself, because it is not only the government that has been active in the development of Canada's mineral potential. Industry is contributing something close to $1 billion per year in research and promotional efforts, encouraging this important economic activity.
In reference to the point raised by the hon. member for Port Arthur and commented upon by the hon. member for York-Scarbor-ough, I do feel that now is the time when the role of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys might well come under reappraisal and re-examination. I say that,
from the standpoint of personal experience, because during the period when I was the minister in the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, I had the privilege of being acting minister for the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys for some months.
It was brought home to me forcibly at that time by virtue of administering the two departments that there was a very close relationship between the functions of the resource aspect and also the northern aspect of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, and many of the functions of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. Oceanography, glaciology, the aeromagnetom-eter surveys, the Canadian geological survey, the geodetic surveys-all these scientific surveys so capably carried out by the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys have a vital and increasing bearing on the success of Canada's attempt to develop her northern frontier.
It is a well known fact, as many commentators have noted, that the economic development of the huge area north of the 60th parallel is going to depend on the development of its rich mineral potential, that vast storehouse of mineral wealth which up to the present time has been pretty well a frozen locker because we have not devised techniques to make exploitation economically feasible. I have before me a recent article by Mr. Bob Hill who has travelled extensively in the north. The article is headed "Minerals in the Northland" and subheaded "Successful Exploitation Far From Assured". The basis of Mr. Hill's remarks in his recent article of August 21 is that successful exploitation is far from assured because we have not yet applied modern scientific techniques to that area in such a manner as to make it economically feasible to exploit this vast storehouse of mineral potential.
If there is going to be a reappraisal and reassessment of the role of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, it would seem to me that consideration might well be given to a closer co-ordination with the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. This point was_ again brought forcibly home during the period when we were preparing for the resources for tomorrow conference. A decision had to be made initially with regard to how far the conference was going to go in considering resources. Was it to be restricted to renewable resources or should it also take into consideration the non-renewable mineral resources of Canada? Solely because
7928	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys of the restrictions of time the conference discussion was restricted to the field of renewable resources with a strong recommendation that there should be a similar conference to consider our non-renewable and exhaustible mineral resources.
I can recall being reminded from time to time by the minister of resources of the province of Quebec, Hon. Rene Levesque, as we proceeded to plan the resources for tomorrow conference that the only reason the federal minister was involved at all in the discussions was that Ottawa did have some responsibility for the resources of northern Canada. It is a well known fact that the provinces have jurisdictional control of their own resources up to the 60th parallel in the prairies and up to the Arctic region, of course, in the province of Quebec.
Here again, emerging out of the circumstance of a thorough discussion of Canada's resources, the thought spontaneously emerged that there was a close co-ordination between the functions of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources and the services provided by the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. Therefore, so far as the point raised by the hon. member for Port Arthur is concerned, I do not think we need to think in terms of the Department of Industry or other departments, but what we need rather is closer co-ordination at the federal and provincial levels in all branches of government which are involved in the development of our resources.
This is demonstrated by the major breakthrough that occurred at the resources for tomorrow conference resulting in the establishment of the permanent body, the council of resource ministers and the secretariat attached thereto. This is a major breakthrough in intergovernmental co-operation and co-ordination. The success of the resource ministers council, located in the city of Montreal as it is, to get it away from any Ottawa orientation, will be determined by the success that the provincial governments have in co-ordinating resourae activities of the various departments at the provincial level, and the leadership given at the federal government level in co-ordinating the functions of the Department of Fisheries, the Department of Forestry, the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources and the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys whose activities in basic scientific research affect the whole area of resource development.
I should like to suggest that the Department of Northern Affairs and National Re-
[Mr. Dinsdale.l
sources is in a position to assume some of these functions because in the past two or three years it has shed itself of certain functions. For example, until four years ago the Department of Forestry came under northern affairs and national resources. In the past two years the Canadian government travel bureau was moved from national resources to the Department of Trade and Commerce, and more recently responsibility for Canada's museums has been assigned to the Secretary of State's department. Here is a change that has been going on without too much detailed planning. It is something that fits into the whole Glassco concept of government reorganization and co-ordination and I would recommend that the minister give attention to this situation.


Mr. Lloyd:: Mr. Chairman, some observations made during the course of the review of the estimates of the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys have prompted me to make some remarks on this occasion. First I should like to express unequivocal support of those members from the maritime provinces who consistently assert the need for a continuing active awareness of the needs of the coal mines and fisheries of Nova Scotia. Without equivocation, as I say, I associate myself with those members who would like to see at Ottawa a continuing active awareness of these two great resources of Canada.
You may fiddle and tinker with administrative machinery, but in such tinkering for heaven's sake let us not lose sight of the main objective, which is to provide to enterprising Canadians every possible assistance from the government to discover the way whereby we can make the most extensive use of the God given resources which we have within the boundaries of our great nation. I would think that any move to abolish a ministry such as the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys and make it a division of the Department of Industry would just be going in the wrong direction.
I think those who subscribe to the view that the free enterprise system contributes to competition would certainly want to see the government perform the role of providing those entrepreneurs who perhaps do not have the resources of the bigger ones, with the fullest possible advantage of the research the government may be able to undertake. I, for one, have always advocated and will always advocate in this house that if there is any role the government should be performing most extensively and actively it is in the field

of research in connection with our natural resources. In this way the government can equate, if you like, the opportunity for those who lack the same capital resources as some of the larger companies who are presently encouraged by tax concessions to engage in research work to further their position in the economic cycle of events in Canada. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I heartily endorse the views of the members of this house who advocate the strengthening and expansion of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys in the field of research, rather than the restriction of those activities.
I should not like to see these activities weakened, lessened or placed in the hands of possibly already overburdened ministers in some other departments. I would be more concerned about breaking down some of the responsibilities of the ministers in this government of Canada than I would be in adding to the responsibilities of some who may be already overburdened, having regard to the fact that some of these departments are so complex now it is impossible for parliamentarians to really follow what is happening.
For example, Mr. Chairman, I think it is a great thing for a government to be concerned about its dollar expenditures. However it must always reconcile those expenditures with the fact that the economy in all parts of our nation is being assisted whenever government dollar expenditures will assist it. It seems to me that we must be very alert when pursuing tax savings to ensure that we do not put any area of Canada in an economic condition which we all deplore. We do not want to add to the volume or size of the designated areas in our pursuit of one thing which happens to be produced efficiently in a central area of Canada, and which the consumers of Canada want or need. I can see sometimes that various ministers who are desirous of economizing end up being penny wise and pound foolish.
I think it would be most unwise, for example, for us to be too quick to criticize subsidies and subventions to the maritime provinces. Let it always be remembered that the industries in the central part of Canada which are turning out products are producing tax carrying products and the consumer, no matter where he lives in Canada, will be making his contribution to the treasury of Canada. I think sometimes this fact is overlooked.
The opportunities for Nova Scotia in the field of oceanography, Mr. Chairman, and the challenge that it presents to extend our fish-
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys eries resources to areas hitherto undreamed of in international markets, deserves the fullest attention of a single minister, rather than being placed as a division in another department of government.


Mr. Soulham:: I, like other members on this side, do not intend to take too much of the committee's time this afternoon. However, like the hon. member for Brandon-Souris, I feel that the number of participants in this discussion is evidence of the importance of this department of government. I wish to take this opportunity of expressing my congratulations to the minister, and to his very efficient department, for carrying on their work to the gratification of the members of this committee over the past year. The former minister of mines and technical surveys, the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue, has expressed on behalf of our party the constructive criticism that should be directed toward this department.
Personally, I rose to say a few words in connection with the coal industry in Saskatchewan. As I have mentioned on several previous occasions, the coal industry in Saskatchewan is a very important part of our economy, particularly in the southeast corner of the province. In looking over the last report of the dominion coal board I noticed some paragraphs that gave me some concern. I quote:
Production of coal in western Canada during 196263 totalled 5,104,000 tons, a decrease of 444,000 tons from production in the previous year.
The biggest drop in output occurred in the Saskatchewan lignite field which produced 2,069,000 tons, a decrease of 325,000 tons from the tonnage of the year before.
Now, this lignite field, as most hon. members know, is in the riding of Moose Mountain and is a very important part of the economy. I continue to quote from the report:
Alberta bituminous coal production was 558,000 tons, a decrease of 124,000 tons; and British Columbia and Yukon production was 882,000 tons, a decrease of 120,000 tons. The only production increase in the west was in Alberta sub-bituminous coal. After many years of steady decline, followed by a levelling off last year, sub-bituminous output rose to 1,595,000 tons, an increase of 125,000 tons.
Of course, the significance of this increase stemmed from the fact that it could be ascribed to the first six months of digging coal for the Wabamun thermal electric plant, recently enlarged by the addition of a 150,000 kilowatt coal fired generating unit.


William Moore Benidickson: I very much hesitate to interfere with the hon. member for Moose Mountain, who is himself very courteous to
7930	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys the house, but it has been the practice to deal first with the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys and then the coal board. I do not know the wish of the committee, but perhaps it would be possible to dispose of the items that are under the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys and then refer to the dominion coal board.


Richard Russell Southam: I am sorry if I have transgressed any of the rules laid down, Mr. Chairman. If you wish me to reserve my remarks until some future time-


Paul Raymond Martineau: Perhaps the minister would be agreeable, since the hon. member has already launched into his remarks, to allowing him to continue his discussion of this item.


William Moore Benidickson: I have no serious objection. I believe the hon. member for Kootenay West wants to say something about coal. I was just thinking about the possibility of disposing of certain items of the estimates, not for the convenience of myself but of the officials who are standing by.


The Chairman:: Is the suggestion made by the minister agreeable to the committee?


Paul Raymond Martineau: Several members have
spoken on the subject and the hon. member who has the floor is quite advanced in his remarks. I think it would be better if he concluded.


Richard Russell Southam: I appreciate the help of the committee in this respect. I was glad to notice that on the order paper, under date of June 29, the minister has the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Coal Production Assistance Act to extend until the 31st day of October, 1969, the period during which agreements may be made under section 3 of the said act.
The amendment introduced to that act by the former minister in December 1962, proved of great value to the lignite industry in Saskatchewan, and no doubt to other coal producing areas, particularly where it had effect on the consecutive payment of loans. This part of the amendment was very beneficial, because rather than having to pay double indemnity, or 60 cents a ton, where they had two loans they could make their payments consecutively.
Earlier this session I was glad the Minister of Trade and Commerce stated the government would follow the previous government's policies with respect to a national grid system. If such a system could be developed at the earliest possible opportunity it would be


of particular benefit to that part of Saskatchewan, which contains about 20 per cent of total Canadian coal deposits. With the thermal steam generation plants that could be developed, similar to the one developed by the Saskatchewan Power Corporation, that area could put into a grid system many million kilowatts of cheap power, which would enhance the economy of that part of the province. I know it is a question of technological development concerning the economical transmission of power over long distances, but I am sure the engineers will overcome this problem in the not too distant future.
In conclusion I wish to ask a specific question with regard to groundwater surveys in Saskatchewan. A great advance was made on this work under the previous government. It is work that is very important to Saskatchewan, as it is one of the more arid regions of Canada. The development and utilization of water is most important to our economy, something which has been evidenced by the many questions and debates on the water problem affecting eastern Canada this year. The Saskatchewan provincial government has been conducting widespread surveys. There is a lot of subterranean water in Saskatchewan, but the surveying and developing of it places quite a load on the province itself. The federal department should accelerate its program in this respect.


William Moore Benidickson: In answer to the hon. member's last question, this season in cooperation with the provincial government we had eight or ten workers dealing with the matter of sunken rivers and subterranean waters. There will probably be a paper available shortly, but the work is continuing.


Lucien Lamoureux: Shall the item carry?


William Moore Benidickson: I still wonder if it would be possible for some of the mines and technical surveys items to receive the approbation of the committee, and leave other items open if necessary, items like 65, 70 and so on, that relate to the coal board. Would that meet with the approval of the hon. member for Kootenay West, who is always here?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: It just so happens that the hon. member for Kootenay West wants to hear the minister talk on the national coal board and the government's policy.


William Moore Benidickson: Having regard to the procedures in the past in dealing with these estimates, I have not with me the officials concerned with the dominion coal board. It has been traditional that we deal with the

mines branch before dealing with the coal board, and if that will suit hon. members, on the next occasion I will have the advice of the officials from the dominion coal board.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: If I am allowed, I want only a few minutes to say a few things. I have been sitting here all afternoon because I am very interested in this department, which is one of the departments which rather hides its light under a bushel. I am interested because of the geographical, topographical, geological and resource development of the mining industry in the Kootenays. I was interested in the remarks made by various speakers such as the hon. member for Port Arthur and the former minister, with respect to the organization and reorganization of the department.
This is strictly a scientific research and technological department, which is fortunately not subjected to the day to day buffeting of political partisan questions, and I think it is a good idea to keep the department within those confines. I shall not go into questions of reorganization or things of that sort, but I do suggest as a result of the discussion this afternoon that it is obvious a good many members are not aware of the over-all services performed by the department.
Though it is too late this session, I suggest that the estimates of this department should be referred to the committee on mines, forests and waters where the departmental officials would have an opportunity to explain to members of the committee the services they perform, what I consider a sort of socialistic service provided for free enterprise, and where the officials could answer questions.


William Moore Benidickson: I would welcome that, Mr. Chairman.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am delighted to hear the minister say so-where they, with the better knowledge of the functions of the department and the services it is performing, can give consideration to what can be done to increase still further the assistance it is rendering to the Canadian people as a whole and to industry in particular.
These are the few remarks I have to make at this time. I am glad to hear that the minister is agreeable to my suggestion.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mining and metallurgical investigations and research-
35. Administration, operation and maintenance including Canada's share of the cost of the common-weath committee on mineral processing and $50,000 for grants in aid of mining and mineral processing research in Canadian universities, $4,985,000.
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
Gordon Minto Churchill: I should like to ask the minister in connection with this item what progress has been made in research activities concerning other uses for uranium. There was some activity a few years ago in connection with the discovery of other uses for this metal-using it to strengthen steel, for example. Has this been a successful research operation? I think the department has some connection with the work which was being undertaken.


William Moore Benidickson: The hon. gentleman had some responsibilities in this field in the past and he will recognize that this is an interdepartmental affair involving the present Department of Industry and the Department of Trade and Commerce as well as the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. Some developments have taken place. Some alloys have been developed which look as though they may be useful in conjunction with uranium. Such information obtained from government research has been made available to the steel companies of the land, but that is about as far as I can go.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Geographical surveys and research-
45. Administration, operation and maintenance including the expenses of the Canadian permanent committee on geographical names and the national committee for Canada of the international geographical union, Canada's fee for membership in the international geographical union and a grant of $500 to the Canadian association of geographers, $653,000.
Paul Raymond Martineau: Would the minister say a word about the upper mantle project? Is it still being carried on?


William Moore Benidickson: Yes, it is continuing. It is a project with which the hon. gentleman was very familiar when he was minister. It has not yet been completed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Research in astronomy and geophysics-
55. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $944,000.
Reynold Rapp: Could the minister explain the increase in payments under the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act in 1964-65 compared with the previous year?


William Moore Benidickson: The terms of payment came before parliament last year and the only change was a restrictive one which meant that no longer would we make payments under the act except to mines where 50 per cent of the employees were already within an existing community. The reason for the increase

Criminal Code
in payments is simply that the grade of ore has been lessening and the cost of production has been increasing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lucien Lamoureux: The dominion coal board.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Five o'clock.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Gordon Minto Churchill: For the convenience of hon. members could I ask the leader of the house to outline the business for Monday and Tuesday?


Mr. Favreau:: On Monday, Mr. Speaker, we shall take as the first order, order No. 67 as it appears on today's order paper which is a resolution preceding a bill to amend the Farm Improvement Loans Act. Then we shall take up order No. 35, a resolution preceding a bill to implement certain recommendations of the royal commission on transportation. After that, we will continue the debate at the committee stage of Bill No. C-72, otherwise known as the redistribution bill.
On Tuesday, if the resolution concerning the Farm Improvement Loans Act has been passed, we shall proceed with the second reading and committee stage of that bill, after which we would take up consideration of a resolution which is being placed on the order paper concerning farm machinery syndicates.


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



CRIMINAL CODE


Mr. R. W. Prittie (Burnaby-Richmond) moved: the second reading of Bill No. C-48, to amend the Criminal Code.
He said: Hon. members will have noted that this bill was seconded, not by a member of my own party but by the hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. Willoughby). I requested the hon. member to do so in order to emphasize the non-partisan nature of this amendment and also because the hon. member for Kamloops is a member of the medical profession and of the Canadian medical association, a body which is interested in the passage of this amendment to the Criminal Code.

At the outset, I wish to state that this bill which I have presented has nothing to do with the world population problem. It has nothing to do with the total size of the population of Canada; we are still a long way from being overcrowded in this country. It is about an archaic law on our statute books which says it is illegal for competent persons such as physicians, pharmacists, pastors and priests to give information on family planning to married couples who want such information.
Section 150 (2) (c) now reads as follows:
Every one commits an offence who knowingly, without lawful justification or excuse, offers to sell, advertises, publishes an advertisement of, or has for sale or disposal any means, instructions, medicine, drug or article intended or represented as a method of preventing conception or causing abortion or miscarriage.
It goes on to say:
(3)	No person shall be convicted of an offence under this section if he establishes that the public good was served by the acts that are alleged to constitute the offence and that the acts alleged did not extend beyond what served the public good.
(4)	For the purposes of this section, it is a question of law whether an act served the public good and whether there is evidence that the act alleged went beyond what served the public good, but it is a question of fact whether the acts did or did not extend beyond what served the public good.
(5)	For the purposes of this section the motives of an accused are irrelevant.
Apart from that possible defence, section 150 is very complete and wide in its scope. Again these are the words of the statute which I want to emphasize:
-offers to sell, advertises, publishes an advertisement of or has for sale or disposal any means, instructions, medicine, drug or article intended or represented as a method of preventing conception-
So the bill is very complete because it uses the word "any".
Now, Mr. Speaker, there are many means of preventing conception. There are mechanical devices, usually rubber, available for both men and women. There are chemical methods, notably the pills about which we hear so much today. There is the rhythm method which is widely used by members of the Roman Catholic faith. But the way section 150 now reads makes it illegal in Canada to advise, prescribe, sell or supply any method of preventing conception.
The terms of the Criminal Code generally are administered by the Department of Justice. However the food and drug directorate of the Department of National Health and Welfare authorizes for use and sale in Canada certain types of birth control pills. In my opinion it is a bad law because it is

so widely disregarded by such a large element of the population, or if you like by such a large and respectable section of the population. Any physician who advises patients on contraceptive methods is breaking the law. Any druggist who sells contraceptive pills or devices breaks the law. Any cleric who advises his parishioners about family planning is breaking the law. Thousands of these people are breaking the law every day because of this archaic statute. More than that, Mr. Speaker, I consider this section of the Criminal Code, which is in that general section of the code dealing with pornography and sexual offences, to be an unwarranted interference by the state in the private lives of married couples. What should be essentially a private and personal affair is in the Criminal Code where it has no place.
We all know that the majority of the Canadian people pay very little attention to this law. Most couples of average income and higher have no difficulty in obtaining the information and devices necessary for family planning. They simply ignore the law. But there are large numbers of people who, because of the circumstances of their lives, depend upon the public health services for their medical care. In most cases the public agencies which serve these people-hospitals and social welfare departments-do not give contraceptive information because it is contrary to the law to do so. So there is this element of the population who may want this information and help but who cannot get it.
There is an exception, Mr. Speaker, and that is the city of Toronto. Recently the council of that city discovered that the city social welfare department was supplying and paying for birth control pills on prescription to recipients of social welfare. The council's committee made an investigation and reported back to the council, and the council and board of control agreed that their social welfare department should continue this practice. I applaud their courage and good sense, but it seems to me that if the law is to be enforced the mayor, controllers and aldermen of the city of Toronto all ought to be taken to court under section 150.
I am sure that all hon. members are aware that there is widespread support in the country for the passage of this bill. Most members have received thousands of letters from their constituents favouring it. Several of our leading newspapers and magazines including the Vancouver Sun, the Edmonton Journal, the Toronto Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star, and Maclean's magazine have
Criminal Code
given strong editorial support for this amendment to the Criminal Code.
Many of the religious denominations have declared themselves in favour of this amendment. These include the board of evangelism and social service of the United Church of Canada and many of the presbyteries of that church, the council for social service of the Anglican Church of Canada and quite a number of the synods of that church. The 90th general assembly of the Presbyterian church, meeting in Toronto in June, passed a resolution in favour of this amendment. The Unitarian Church of Canada, of which I am a member favours this reform. The Baptist conventions of Ontario and Quebec have also endorsed approval of this bill. Quite a number of other organizations have gone on record during the past year or two as supporting a change to section 150 of the Criminal Code. These include the children's aid society of Ontario, the Canadian medical association, the Canadian association of obstetrics and gynaecology, the Canadian council of women, and the voice of women. By no means least, and as one would expect, the planned parenthood associations in Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, Hamilton and Ottawa have worked assiduously for this particular reform.
Now, Mr. Speaker, people have said to me many times that the Roman Catholic church would prove a real obstacle to getting this type of bill passed. I am not at all sure that this is the case. The Roman Catholic church is not opposed to family planning as such. It recognizes that there is a case for family limitation. The church distinguishes between what it calls natural and unnatural methods of controlling conception. The present debate within the church has to do with that very subject-what is natural and what is not. Inasmuch as I am not a member of that church I do not want to comment further on the present debate within the church, I only want to say that many prominent clergy and laymen of the Roman Catholic church take the attitude that they do not wish to impose their beliefs upon persons of other faiths.
As an example of that particular viewpoint I want to quote from a news story in the Vancouver Sun in March of this year which reported on a panel discussion in Vancouver. One of the members of the panel was Father James R. Roberts of the Roman Catholic matrimonial tribunal of the archdiocese of Vancouver, who has something to say in the article. The article reads:

Criminal Code
Bad laws breed disrespect for the law itself, according to Father James R. Roberts, member of the Roman Catholic matrimonial tribunal.
"For any law to be effective and serve the community it must be backed by the general acceptance of that community, otherwise the mass violations (even in good conscience) of that law, produce disrespect for the law," he explained.
"Prohibition did not have the support of the community and the disastrous results of that puritanical law prove this point," he added.
In his opinion the basic issue is one of civil rights.
"We (Roman Catholics) support the principle of civil rights for Negroes and for Indians but all this would be hogwash if we were not truly sensitive to the current question of civil rights in B.C.
"And the law prohibiting the sale and use of contraceptives here is an infringement on those rights," he said, enlarging on remarks he made at a panel discussion last week on quality or quantity.
Father Roberts said that he "realizes many nonCatholics in Canada hold the Roman Catholic church responsible for the preservation of this archaic legislation".
"But this is not true," he said.
"Although we may hold that certain methods of birth control are immoral, we are not obliged to force our moral code on the civil law," he explained.
I realize that everyone in the church does not hold that view, but there are a very substantial number of the theologians and laymen of the church who do hold that view. It is a matter of civil rights for each person to decide for himself.
Yesterday the general council of the Canadian medical association wired the Minister of Justice (Mr. Favreau) urging passage of this bill. Last night the 21st general council of the United Church of Canada meeting in St. John's, Newfoundland sent a telegram to the Prime Minister asking that there be a free vote on this bill. I do not believe, Mr. Speaker-I do not think I am being naive about this

that there is any plan to talk this bill out. I understand that there is wide support for it in all parts of the house. I understand that there can be a free vote, but if there is to be such a free vote I would respectfully ask members who want to speak in favour of the bill-and there are quite a few-to keep their remarks quite brief so that we can proceed to a vote, because there is no general plan as far as I know to talk it out. If we can do that and give the necessary reading to the bill today we can correct one part of our law which many thousands of our citizens have asked to be corrected.


Mr. Joseph P. O'Keefe (St. John's Easi):: Mr. Speaker, despite the rather plausible argument of the mover of this resolution I wish to voice my personal opposition to the bill proposed. I do not for a moment suggest

that in this matter, or indeed in any other, I am voicing the views of all my constituents. I am confident however, that I reflect the feelings of a great many people, and most certainly my own.
I oppose this bill on principle and not merely as a matter of conscience. Our function in proposing legislation-as I understand that function-is to propose and to enact laws which are in the best interests of the common good. This bill asks us to legalize that which is beyond our jurisdiction. My opinion is that the determination of what is morally good or bad is not within our competence. I suggest we legislate within a determined area of morality. For instance, theft, murder, and other crimes are not morally good or bad simply because we make them so by legislation. They are against the natural law, and not because Canadians, British, United States or other legislators declare that they are.
I oppose this bill in practice. What has been the experience of those countries which have enacted this legislation? Cursory reading indicates that some countries at least are now very much concerned over the consequences of the legalized sale of contraceptives. They have experienced, and are now experiencing depravity, promiscuity and a rampant recklessness among the young-and not only the young.
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this government or of any government, is, or certainly should be, to promote the common good and to work diligently for a more equitable distribution of wealth. The government knows full well that, in fact, contraceptives will be purchased especially by unmarried people and by the young, resulting in corruption of public morals. In my opinion this or any government should not permit these gravest of social evils, evils which attack morals, attack married life and attack the family, the very foundation of our society. The family should and must be protected at all costs.
May I quote a word or two here from an address given by His Excellency the Governor General at the opening ceremony of the Canadian conference on the family. His Excellency said:
To my way of thinking, the best and surest way of developing generous and idealistic hearts, of giving the community men and women who are well balanced and conscious of their responsibilities to their country, is to protect the family, for the family-far from opposing the interests of society -is capable of giving to the universe the human beings who are prepared to put justice and truth before their own personal interests.
Any government, but particularly this government, has to work for the material better-

ment of the people, and to work for a better distribution of food, of work and of wealth. Let it not be said finally that we are merely legalizing what is being done anyway. This argument is pragmatism at its lowest and its very worst, and unworthy of public mention, unworthy of representatives and unworthy of this house. Such an argument could extend to anything, for instance to a certification of firearms and their indiscriminate use, and we would then witness assassination and mass murder. How pragmatic can we get?
The answer to the problem of poverty, Mr. Speaker, is obvious. We must increase the supply of food and jobs, and certainly not decrease the population. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, not wishing to emphasize the obvious, I oppose this bill in practice, on principle and in all conscience.


Charles James McNeil Willoughby: Mr. Speaker, in seconding this motion I did so because I support the amendment and consider the act as it now reads as being a serious hypocrisy. The law as the act now stands is not being enforced, which makes the hypocrisy even more obvious. I feel this bill involves a great national issue and affects the enforcement of law and order not only in this regard but in regard to other laws, and leads to a disregard for laws generally.
This bill also has some international implication. The last speaker made a very pertinent remark when he suggested one of our duties in this country involves the distribution of food. I do not intend to go into this subject in detail, but I wonder whether he is aware of the fact that the world population today is almost three billion, that four out of every five deaths in the world today are directly or indirectly the result of lack of proper nourishment, and that empty stomachs know no laws? I am sure he is aware that communism thrives when stomachs are empty. Statistics have been presented which indicate that in 40 years the population of this continent will have doubled, and that in 65 years, at the present rate of growth, the world population will be in the neighbourhood of 50 billion. To support the population expected in the United States within 25 or 30 years that country will have to find 400 million more arable acres of land.


Mr. Habel:: Would the hon. member permit a question? Is he not now, by the remarks he is making, departing from what the hon. member who sponsored the bill said was not its concern, namely the world population?
Criminal Code


Charles James McNeil Willoughby: I recognize the fact that this bill does not directly implicate world population, but how can we assist the world population conscientiously while at the same time remaining hypocrites in our own country? We must increase the world food supply. I suggest there are only two ways out of the problem created by world population explosions. One is to create more arable land and grow more agricultural products-growing four blades of grass where only one grows now-or assist in curtailing the increase in the world population. How can we do this with conscience and yet remain hypocrites? Canada has ample space and an ample food supply, but we have an international duty.
I suggest the problem envisaged by the mover of this bill is not a religious one. I have the greatest respect for any religion and would be the last one to criticize, but because of our hypocritical attitude, if the law involved was enforced most medical men and druggists at the present time would be in jail. How ridiculous can a situation become? No one is permitted to accept advice in respect of contraceptives as the law is now, and no one will be compelled to accept that advice if and when the law is changed. Let us put all the cards on the table rather than pushing some of them under it.
I should like to conclude by endorsing the remarks of the proposer of this bill, and by emphasizing at the present time that most religious organizations in Canada are prepared to support the amendment. The Canadian bar association has recommended that this amendment be made. The Canadian medical association has also recommended that this amendment be made. Most religious bodies, if they have not endorsed the amendment, do approve of family planning.
Interestingly enough, Mr. Speaker, on the average family planning has not curtailed the number of children in most families in Canada. It has been done in such a way that it has been for the benefit not only of the parents but also of the children. The result is that on the average Canadian families are larger today than they were before this subject was ever introduced. There is nothing to worry about on that score.
As a medical man, the big factor so far as I am concerned is that this type of proper instruction will overcome the terrible illegal abortions that are performed. I do not think we should overlook that fact for one minute. I endorse the bill because the present provision in the act is hypocritical and a real farce. The amendment is endorsed by all the

Criminal Code
organizations I have mentioned and I feel that under the circumstances the house should approve it to remove this hypocrisy from the Criminal Code. In doing so I believe we will offer no offence to any person or organization.


Mr. C. A. Gauthier (Roberval):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to protest against the passage of this bill. I have seen many happenings in the house but this time things have gone too far. When I hear men speak in favour of such legislation, I wonder where the people of Canada are going.
This is working toward the destruction of the human race.
Not satisfied with having authorized the opening of drinking places on practically every street corner to facilitate the degradation of modern society, not satisfied with having enticed our young girls and our women to taverns and grills to degrade womanhood, we are now seeking to make women sterile. In my opinion, that is a diabolical scheme.
Mr. Speaker, the whole of Canada must speak out against those who support this bill. We have no right to put such a dangerous, indeed, such a diabolical weapon into the hands of the people.
Most of us are Christians, and as such, it is our duty to put up as strong a fight as possible against this legislation.
A few minutes ago, I heard someone say that this is not a religious problem-


Mr. Basford:: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. The hon. member has just implied that those who support this bill are not Christian. I dissociate myself from that implication, and I ask him to withdraw it because it is not true. I support the bill and I am also a Christian.


Charles-Arthur Gauthier: It it well and good to disassociate oneself, Mr. Speaker, but I will prove to you what I am saying.
Someone said a little earlier that this is not a religious problem. Well, if he goes over his religious principles, he will read in the gospel: Thou shall not kill. It is one of the ten commandments.
I wonder if the killing of a barely conceived child is not as much a murder as that of a 40 or 60 year old individual.
I do not understand that the law of man can prevail over the law of God. That is why I say to the hon. member who rose a little earlier-


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Order. The hon. member for Carleton on a question of privilege.


Cyril Lloyd Francis: Mr. Speaker, the reflections made by the hon. member on the consciences of other members of the house are not in order. I for one support the bill, and I am not endorsing murder or anything like that. The implication that I am is an unwarranted reflection upon the consciences of members of the house.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: The Chair recognizes that the argument the hon. member for Roberval is now making is a very delicate one indeed. I am sure he would not wish to make any inferences that would in any way interfere with the thinking of other members of the house.


Charles-Arthur Gauthier: Mr. Speaker, it was not my
intention to attack anyone. I only wanted to put forward Christian principles. If the cap fits someone, it is not my business, and even less my fault.
Mr. Speaker, I maintain that we cannot in any way support this bill which reads as follows:
Offers to sell, advertises, publishes an advertisement of, or has for sale or disposal any means, instructions, medicine, drug or article intended or represented as a method of causing abortion or miscarriage, or-
I say that this bill is unacceptable and I shall make every effort so that it is not carried for my province. If others want to accept it for their own province, they are free to do so, but I swear that in 15 years there will only be French Canadians left in Canada. That will be the result of this bill.
Today, we are afraid. It is said that in the year 2000, there will be too many people. Well, Mr. Speaker, let us not worry about that; man is stupid enough to destroy himself, you can be sure of that. God is stronger than all that. People should not worry about how many of them there will be in the year 2000. That is not the purpose of the bill. I think that it was determined by people other than members of parliament and that it comes from much higher.
Imagine the result if people could get such drugs at all the little comer stores. Imagine what would happen to our young people, in our homes. Think of what would happen to our people; in ten years from now, with this system, there would be no people left and the

Black and Chinese people would come and replace us in Canada.
Those are the consequences the passing of this bill would have, if its application were to be left to individuals who are not prepared to accept those drugs. That is a problem.
First, it is a medical problem, besides being a moral problem. I appreciate that if it takes the advice of higher medical authorities, the government will be able to legislate in such a way as to enable, not all the people but the competent authorities, to use certain drugs in cases of sickness, great weakness and so on, but it should be severely controlled, like all poisons, some drugs and injections which are now reserved exclusively to the medical board.
I suggest that it is not at all the business of the house to study this problem, but we should rather leave it to higher medical authorities from which the government might take advice, as it always does-


Cyril Lloyd Francis: Will the hon. member permit a question? He said that this is no business of the House of Commons. May I ask him why, since this concerns part of the Criminal Code which was enacted by this House of Commons?


Charles-Arthur Gauthier: Mr. Speaker, this happens to be prohibited by the Criminal Code, because our fathers were much wiser than some of us are today. They thought that natural law should not take precedence over divine law, and that is why we have today some very judicious clauses in the old Criminal Code.
I realize that the more we seem to become refined, the more stupidly we act. I believe that the old saying: "He who acts the angel, acts the beast" is still true. I also realize that we are heading in that direction today.
I stated that this was a medical problem which should be submitted to the relevant authorities. If our prominent medical authorities were consulted on this point, as are high religious authorities on the moral aspects of the case, I am sure that we would obtain legislation more in keeping with the medical point of view, and that it would not be legal to sell those drugs like a bottle of Pepsi, in the corner store.
Those are our reasons, Mr. Speaker. If, today, vaccines or shots of all kinds, which are only given with a medical prescription, were sold in all the small stores, in short, if all drugs and remedies subject to medical
Criminal Code
prescription were made available to the general public, I think that the house would commit a grave error. And that is exactly the error we are about to commit, if we pass this bill.
This is a field which should be restricted exclusively to the higher medical authorities. Furthermore, we should bear in mind the serious moral problem which the passing of this bill would create in every province, especially in the province of Quebec where the majority of the people are Roman Catholics.


Charles James McNeil Willoughby: Will the hon. member permit a question? I understood him to say that this should be left to the medical authorities. I would appreciate the hon. member telling me how this could be left to the medical authorities, when if they give this advice they are breaking the criminal law?


Charles-Arthur Gauthier: If I read the bill correctly, I think the medical authorities accept it as an ordinary medical product just as any other patent medicine. That is precisely to what I am objecting. I do not want birth control pills to be sold as freely as Buckley's syrup or any other such medicine. I think most of the hon. members will agree with me that the bill, as it now stands, is simply dreadful. If the bill only provided for a study of the question by the medical board, I would support it. But the purpose is to make this available to the public, and to that I object. I suggest that the people are not ready for such publicity, particularly when we know the meaning of publicity nowadays. It is said that everything is a matter of publicity, that anything worthless can be sold with good publicity.


Mr. Lachance:: Social Credit for instance.


Charles-Arthur Gauthier: It would be the best thing if Social Credit could make use of that publicity, but the old line parties and financiers prevent it from doing so because it is not a paying proposition.
Publicity has to be curbed, Mr. Speaker. The only means to curb publicity is to refer this question for consideration by higher authorities who are as competent as most of the members of the house, because, for my part, I am speaking as a father putting forward his principles as a Roman catholic. I know that the bill conflicts with ethics and public interests, though some members have involved the Roman Catholic religious authorities when speaking of public interests. Religious authorities favour public interests

Criminal Code
but let no one try to distort the question tor this reason. Roman Catholic authorities are opposed to the bill as drafted.


Mrs. Konanlz:: May I ask a question? Does the hon. member realize that the Canadian medical association have given their endorsa-tion to this bill? If so, does he realize that the drugs to which he is referring would be given under prescription only and that this bill would not change that?


Charles-Arthur Gauthier: I am very pleased, Mr. Speaker, to hear that, but, if you read this bill, unless I do not know French anymore, or do not know how to read, it is not that at all. Advertising and publicity are to be allowed. Read the bill carefully and you will admit that it becomes a popular product. Now, it is for this very reason that we will always oppose such a bill as long as the sale of this product will not be subjected to medical prescription.
It is for this reason that we are against this bill. I believe there are others who wish to express their opposition as well, and I shall give them the opportunity to express their opinion to prove that I am not the only one opposing this bill.


Cyril Lloyd Francis: Mr. Speaker, I will not take up too much of the time of this house. I know that the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. O'Keefe) has spoken, and much as I respect his views I do not agree with them. I have had a great many communications on this bill, even more than I have had on the flag. I have received something like 800 individual communications with regard to this bill. I have had resolutions from four churches in my riding and communications from a substantial number in addition to those.
I should like to put on the record the official views expressed through the authorities representing the different religious bodies in Canada. The Anglican Church of Canada, on September 2 and 3 of this year, at a general meeting of the executive council of the general synod and its council for social services, passed the following resolution:
Whereas the Lambeth conference of 1958 has, within the concept of the exercise of responsible freedom, given general approval to the practice of family planning and has set forth some of the principles to be considered by Christians in such practice;
And whereas for all people in Canada the exercise of responsible freedom in the area of family

planning with due respect for civil law, is made impossible by existing legislation which prohibits the sale or dispensing of instruction, medicine or drug, or articles for use in family planning;
And whereas for certain groups in Canada the exercise of responsible freedom in the area of family planning is not possible either for economic reasons, or because of lack of factual knowledge or understanding, thus making the achievement of a full and rich marriage and family life more difficult than it might otherwise be,
This council for social service meeting in joint session with the executive council of general synod,
Urges that every effort be made to amend present legislation in Canada in such a way as to make legal the dispensing of information and means under competent medical or other professional guidance, so as to enable spouses, irrespective of their economic circumstances, who wish to exercise their freedom in planning and spacing their families in accordance with their physical and economic means, to do so with adequate knowledge and instruction.
And affirms that the dissemination of information about family planning within the context of the principles enunciated by the Lambeth conference of 1958 is a responsible practice within the education and pastoral ministry of the Anglican church.
In June 1964 the Baptist convention of Ontario and Quebec passed a resolution, the text of which I do not have in front of me, but it acknowledged the fact that very many people are violating the law as it now stands, and recommended the deletion of the words from the Criminal Code "preventing contraception or".
The Presbyterian Church of Canada adopted the following resolution at the last meeting of the general assembly:
That the general asembly call upon the federal government to revise section 150, subsection 2c of the Criminal Code of Canada re conception control-
And it gives the wording.
-so that in matters relating to the prevention of conception, the clergy, medical profession, family counsellors of governmental and municipal agencies and druggists be exempted from the section of the law having reference to advertising, instructing or selling to married couples.
Then there is the United Church of Canada:
Report of the board of evangelism and social service, 1964 approved by general council of the United Church of Canada.
And this is a substantial re-endorsement of the 1962 general resolution of the general council:
Whereas section 150 of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with, "offences tending to corrupt morals", and subsection 2c of this section states that "everyone commits an offence who...offers to sell, advertises, publishes an advertisement of, or has for sale or disposal any means, instruction, medicines, drugs or article intended or represented as a method of preventing conception or causing abortion or miscarriage",

Whereas section 150	(2c) offends against the
religious beliefs of the majority of Canadians since it makes a criminal offence of something which the churches believe to be a moral necessity in these days;
Whereas the act as it stands tends to inhibit social agencies from offering advice and assistance in family planning;
And whereas legalizing of the advertising, sale and instruction in the use of contraceptives would tend to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, and would tend to diminish the number of illegal abortions;
And whereas the majority of physicians are prepared to prescribe for their patients appropriate contraceptive measures, i.e. those which are religiously, medically and aesthetically satisfactory;
And whereas section 150 (2c) has never been rigidly enforced by legal authorities;
And whereas section 150 (2c) prevents Canada from taking an effective part in aiding those nations attacked by population explosion, which, if unchecked, must inevitably lead to lower living standards, world instability, and ultimately, to war.
Be it resolved that this board:
1.	Recommend that subsection 2c of section 150 of the Criminal Code of Canada be amended by the deletion of the three words-"preventing contraception or''.
2.	Recommended that the church take responsibility at the local level for the encouragement of planned parenthood associations where medical leadership can be given.
3.	Recommend a copy of this action be sent to the Minister of Justice, the Solicitor General of Canada and the members of parliament.
Mr. Speaker, I shall now quote from the Globe and Mail of January 7, 1964, an interview by Mrs. George Cadbury, secretary of the Toronto planned parenthood association:
Though the P.P.A. executive is top-heavy with Anglican and United Church ministers, rabbis, professors and doctors, the association is unable to get a charter from the provincial government, unable to advertise, and severely restricted in its operations.
This is the result of the cloud which has been raised by the present wording of the Criminal Code. An organization, a planned parenthood association, seeks to incorporate and cannot get a charter for the promoting of its activities in which its members believe, according to their own religious counsellors. There is no question of this being anything other than a free vote according to conscience, and members of this house can vote as their consciences dictate.
I listened to a member from the other side who spoke in exaggerated terms of what were religious opinions and what were crimes in moral law, but we have to recognize that there are differences-differences in consciences, differences in religious affiliations and points of view. The official organs representing the
Criminal Code
opinion of something like 50 per cent of the population, according to the latest census, have gone on record asking this parliament to delete these three words from the Criminal Code of Canada. A substantial majority of the population of my riding, Carleton, are represented by these particular religious bodies whose authorities I have quoted. I hope, Mr. Speaker, that the members of this house will recognize that this is a matter of conscience and should not be a matter of the Criminal Code. I hope they will exercise that conscience freely, and allow this bill to go to a committee.


Auguste Choquette: May I ask the hon. member a question?

Mr. Speaker, inasmuch as it is clear that such a measure would pave the way for the most damaging abuse and the most awful immorality, is my colleague not of the opinion that, if the purpose of the amendment is really to be achieved, its wording should not be quite so general? It seems to me that its present form is not conducive to the attainment of the objective the sponsor of the bill has in mind. On the contrary, it would open the door to frightening abuses.


Cyril Lloyd Francis: Mr. Speaker, I am quite happy to recognize there may be amendments that should be considered in committee. If the hon. member believes it is possible to improve the bill, then I think that is the appropriate place to do it; but I do believe at this stage the bill should be permitted by the house to go to committee.


Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, I observe that the hour of six o'clock is approaching in a moment or two and that the time available for discussion of this bill is about one minute. In view of that fact, and the further fact that the hour devoted to private members' public bills was encroached upon today to a considerable extent, so that the hon. member did not have a chance to introduce his bill until quite a few minutes after five o'clock, I would like to ask the house to agree that this bill retain its place on the order paper, especially in view of the great interest of hon. members and many members of the Canadian public in it.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Order. Does the house agree that Bill No. C-48 shall retain its place on the order paper?

Criminal Code


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: There is not unanimous consent.


An hon. Member:: Bigots.


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Speaker, maybe I have just time to say two or three words in the few remaining seconds. I am glad to be able to say that I am against the bill now before us. My stand is based on words which are to be found in the book on
which we took our oath of office when we came to this house. Those words are: "Go forth, multiply, and fill the earth." I did not find there any words saying that, if at anytime there are too many of you, use the means made available to you by the government. [Text]


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


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

[The following Items were passed in committee of supply this day]:

[Stage Direction]
Administration-
1. Departmental administration, $2,099,000.
Health services-
5. Administration, operation and maintenance, including grants as detailed in the estimates, $7,239,450.
10. To authorize general health grants to the provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates and under terms and conditions approved by the governor in council including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $39,236,391, $31,000,000.
15. To authorize hospital construction grants to the provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates and under terms and conditions approved by the governor in council including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $29,666,575, $20,000,000.
Medical services-
20. Administration, operation and maintenance including authority to make recoverable advances in amounts not exceeding in the aggregate the total of all amounts to be paid by the governments of provinces and territories under agreements to be entered on terms approved by the governor in council with such governments in respect of health assistance to persons residing on Indian reserves other than Indians and to residents of the territories other than Indians and Eskimos, $31,033,000.
25. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment including payments to hospitals and other institutions which care for Indians and Eskimos as contributions towards the construction of hospitals and related facilities, $3,449,000.
Food and drug services-
30. Administration, operation and maintenance, $4,093,000.
35. Construction or acquisition of equipment $241,000.
Welfare services-
40. Administration, operation and maintenance, including grants as detailed in the estimates, $4,060,300.
45. National welfare grants-To authorize, on terms and conditions approved by the governor in council, national welfare grants to provinces and welfare agencies including schools of social work, and to individuals in the form of scholarships and fellowships, $1,000,000.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Administration services-
1. Departmental administration including the administration of the Explosives Act and Canada's
Supply-Items Passed fee for membership in the Pan-American institute of geography and history, $2,191,000.
Administration services- la. Departmental administration, $157,000.
5. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment including common-use field survey equipment, $458,000.
Field and air surveys, mapping and aeronautical charting-
10. Administration, operation and maintenance including purchases of air photography and the expenses of the interdepartmental committee on air surveys, authority to make recoverable advances not exceeding the amount of the share of the United States government of the cost of binding annual reports and maintaining boundary range lights and a grant of $1,000 to the Canadian institute of surveying, $6,785,000.
Marine surveys and research-
15. Administration, operation and maintenance including Canada's fee for membership in the international hydrographic bureau, $7,131,000.
20. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $3,360,000.
Geological research-
25. Administration, operation and maintenance including Canada's share of the cost of the geological liaison office, British commonwealth scientific conference, London, England and $100,000 for grants in aid of geological research in Canadian universities, $6,650,000.
30. Construction	or acquisition of buildings,
works, land and equipment, $394,000.
Mining and metallurgical investigations and research-
35. Administration, operation and maintenance including Canada's share of the cost of the commonwealth committee on mineral processing and $50,000 for grants in aid of mining and mineral processing research in Canadian universities. $4,985,000.
40. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $383,000.
Geographical surveys and research-
4b Administration, operation and maintenance including the expenses of the Canadian permanent committee on geographical names and the national committee for Canada of the international geographical union, Canada's fee for membership in the international geographical union and a grant of $500 to the Canadian association of geographers, $653,000.
Research in astronomy and geophysics-
Administration, operation and maintenance including the expenses of the national committee for Canada of the international astronomical union Canada's fee for membership in the international astronomical union and a grant of $3,500 to the royal astronomical society of Canada, $2,102,000.
55. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $944,000.
General-
60. Polar continental shelf project, $1,596,000.