1965-06-23

THE ROYAL ASSENT

Mr. Deputy Speaker:: 

DISCOVERY DAY, NEWFOUNDLAND-ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST DAY, QUEBEC

Hon. Paul  Marlin@Acting Prime Minister: Mr. Speaker, I should like to note that today is the anniversary of the discovery of Newfoundland by Giovanni Caboto in 1497. While Newfoundland was not then a part of Canada, all of us are very happy in the knowledge that this important anniversary will mean so much to the people of Newfoundland as it certainly does to all the people from one end of Canada to the other. We congratulate in a special way our colleagues in this House from Newfoundland.

As hon. members already know, proceedings of the house will be suspended tomorrow in order that they may celebrate properly St. John the Baptist Day, the national holiday of French speaking Canadians.
On behalf of the government and, I am sure, of every member of this house, I want to extend our best wishes to all French speaking Canadians.
There is no need to recall the unique contribution made by the French element of this country to the planning and development of our institutions. It is also with the greatest
interest that we have observed, these last few years, the new upsurge, the new vitality of our French speaking compatriots. I have no doubt that in the years to come they will continue to leave their mark on the life of this country. This will only be possible if the mutual understanding and goodwill that made Canada a country in a class by itself continue to prevail.
I wish, therefore, that this 24th of June will not only be a day of celebration for a group that is proud of its traditions and customs, but an occasion for all Canadians to show those brotherly feelings and common interests which are the basis of our national unity.


Hon. Michael Starr (Ontario):: Mr. Speaker, today is truly an auspicious day, as the Acting Prime Minister has mentioned. We wish to join with him in extending our congratulations and best wishes to the Members from Newfoundland. I can only say that Giovanni Caboto in the year 1497 was indeed lucky that he did not run into the hon. Member for Bonavista-Twillingate.
Speaking seriously for a moment, today is also an auspicious occasion in this House since I understand both the Acting Prime Minister and the Minister of Transport are celebrating their birthdays. We also extend to them our heartiest congratulations from this side of the House.
I join, Mr. Speaker, with the Acting Prime Minister in extending to our colleagues of the French language and to all French speaking Canadians our congratulations and best wishes on a day commemorating the existence and survival of their language and culture in America. It is a day significant for all French speaking Canadians, but equally significant for all Canadians.
Without the presence of French Canada there would be no Confederation and no Canada today. Confederation accorded constitutional recognition to the cultural and language rights of French Canada. In producing a new charter for Canada's second 100 years those rights must be recognized and emphasized. I believe, and the Conservative Party believes, in a Canada free, independent

June 23, 1965
St. John the Baptist Day and sovereign. The maintenance of that freedom, independence and sovereignty is based on the fundamental association of the Confederation partnership. I do not believe a strong and united Canada can be based on the principle of separation, whether modified, qualified or rendered in legislation. You cannot build unity on separation.
The challenge of our time lies in the adjustment of our national structure so as to provide full and complete participation by all Canadians in the partnership of Confederation. The celebration of St. John the Baptist Day should therefore be regarded as an occasion in which all Canadians can take pride, commemorating as it does the continuing contribution of French Canada within Confederation.

To all French Canadians on the occasion of St. John the Baptist Day, best wishes, greetings and heartiest congratulations.


Mr. R. W. Pritiie (Burnaby-Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, on the occasion of St. John the Baptist Day we want to express our best wishes to our French speaking members and fellow citizens throughout Canada.
This feast day is further evidence of the deep desire to see the French language and culture survive in Canada.
May I take this opportunity to remind all French Canadians that equal respect should be shown toward the feast days that various groups like to celebrate, such as St. John the Baptist Day and the Queen's birthday.

We are also happy about the exploits of Giovanni Caboto, and extend our best wishes to the two ministers on their birthday.


Mr. Guy Marcoux (Quebec-Montmorency):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to join with the various groups in their words about the anniversary of the discovery of Newfoundland and the birthday of two ministers of the crown. I think we must also emphasize the work of the premier of Newfoundland who was instrumental in this province becoming part of Canada. I think we should wish a long life to Josephus Minuslignus, the premier of Newfoundland at this time.
On the occasion of the French Canadian feast day, I do not believe it would be appropriate for a French speaking Canadian to boast about his nation. On the other hand, I do want to point out that French Canadians

have always shown great loyalty and a good deal of civic spirit when they discovered the country and maintained in the province of Quebec the French language and culture in Canada.


Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapointe):: Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to offer my best wishes to the two ministers who are to-day celebrating their birthday. They were born under the same star, on the same day, have followed the same path and are still doing so. I trust these two gentlemen, who have won the esteem of all the members, will for a long time to come make available their long experience to those of us who are younger than they here in Parliament for I am convinced all have already benefited from their advice and friendship in the past. We are therefore happy to wish them the best, and we trust they will remain with us for a long time still, because we intend to stay here for a long while.
We also wish to take this opportunity to extend our very best wishes to the citizens of Newfoundland who are to-day celebrating an important anniversary.
It is tomorrow, June 24, that French Canadians will celebrate the feast day of their patron saint, St. John the Baptist. Parliament will take a holiday on the occasion of this feast day, that is, all members of the house, whether they come from Newfoundland or British Columbia, the Prairies, the Maritimes or Ontario.
We are happy to see the French fact in Canada being officially acknowledged by everyone in every Canadian province. We are happy to see that for the first time this year, this feast day will be celebrated by a holiday in the Canadian parliament. This will indicate the official recognition of the French fact and we are very glad about it.
I should like to take this opportunity to extend, on behalf of our leader, the hon. member for Villeneuve (Mr. Caouette), and of the members of our group, our best wishes to all our French-Canadian fellow-countrymen on the occasion of this feast day.
As everybody knows, a rather tremendous development is taking place in French Canada and we hope it will go on in a quiet and peaceful atmosphere. We are convinced that even though this national holiday is celebrated in peace and quiet, this development will go on much longer and further for the benefit of all French Canadians in the country. [English]


Mr. Martin (Essex East):: May I have the indulgence of the House to acknowledge
June 23, 1965

briefly the words addressed by the hon. Member for Ontario and other leaders to the rediscoverer of Newfoundland, Giovanni Pick-ersgill, and myself. I thank them for the warm congratulations they have extended, and wish to say on behalf of my colleague and myself how very much we appreciate these expressions of good wishes on a day which means so much to us both.



AIR TRANSPORT


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):: I should like to table for the information of hon. Members a statement I have issued today regarding an agreement with France to permit the establishment of a direct air service between Canada and the Island of Guadeloupe in the West Indies. Perhaps, since we are recalling history today, some hon. Members may recollect that the French gave Canada to the British because Guadeloupe was at that time considered to be more valuable.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Hon. Theogene Ricard (Sainl-Hyacinihe-Bagot):: Mr. Speaker, I wish the Minister of Transport (Mr. Pickersgill) had given us a French copy of his statement. However, since he gave us only an English copy, I will make my comments in English.

I should like to thank the Minister for his courtesy in providing us with his statement in English, while reminding him that in similar circumstances in the future we would appreciate having such statements in both French and English.
We would have expected the Minister, having been in Paris for a few days, would have taken advantage of his knowledge of the French language by issuing statements in both French and English on his arrival here. We hope his visit will prove beneficial not only to himself but to all manufacturers in Canada and in French Canada, and will lead to greater opportunities for both French and other citizens of the City of Montreal.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I should just like to point out that as a courtesy I sent to the leader of the party opposite a copy of the statement in the language he habitually uses. I apologize for not having sent a copy in French, though I tabled copies, of course, in both languages.
Air Transport Service


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Perhaps this will complete the debate on that aspect of the motion.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, about this motion, I would like to point out that we received from the Minister of Transport (Mr. Pickersgill) a copy in very good French and we wish to thank him for it.
We are happy to see that the Minister of Transport has bound us even more closely to the French government. As a matter of fact, commercial transactions will be made with the French government and an agreement has been reached with France to enable Air Canada to serve the Guadeloupe-Montreal line.
I think that announcement will be welcomed by all, because whoever visits Guadeloupe finds it a wonderful country. It is possible that France preferred Guadeloupe to Canada but, at that time, there was a man called Voltaire who claimed that New France was only a few acres of snow. I am quite sure that the French have long been sorry for that decision. In any event, Canada has developed; it is now a large nation, but all the same Guadeloupe is a delightful place where it is nice to go on holidays.
We are happy to see that an airline service between Canada and the island of Guadeloupe will make it possible for all of us to go and visit this enchanting country.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Speaker, I should like to call the attention of the house to the fact that we have just witnessed another patent proof of the marriage between the Liberal party and the Ralliement Creditiste, since-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: -since the Conservative party which forms the official opposition in the house was also entitled to-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. The hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe-Bagot may or may not have a justified complaint against the government but I do not think his question of privilege is well taken.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I should like to raise a question of privilege which stems from the fact that our intent and decisions have been questioned, in particular by the party sitting on your left, namely the Progressive Conservative party.
June 23, 1965

Administration of Justice I merely acknowledged the courtesy of the government when French and English copies of the statement were sent to us, but I was not trying to support the ideas of the government.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is the hon. member rising on a new question of privilege?


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I want to say that as a member of the official opposition in the house I am entitled to the same courtesy on the part of the government, that is to receive French and English copies of the statement made before the house. The government has not shown us that courtesy and that is why I take this opportunity to prove to the house once again that the rights of the official opposition have been violated.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I am just wondering whether it might be convenient, since there has been some comment about this matter, for all Members if the House would agree to having the statement made an appendix to today's Hansard-


Some hon. Members:: No.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -in both languages, so we would know what we had been discussing.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


Hon. Guy Favreau (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to table an information pamphlet entitled in French "La peine capi-tale-Documentation sur son sujet et sa valeur" and in English "Capital Punishment-Material Relating to Its Purpose and Value". This document was prepared by the Department of Justice under my direction. As I had indicated to the house, I forwarded a draft copy of this document before it was printed to a member of each of the five parties. I was pleased to note that each of those members stated that the information contained in this document had been found objective and nonpartisan.
I wish to thank all parties for their cooperation in that respect and I hope that the information made available today to hon. 
members and senators will help them to form a considered opinion on the various aspects of this disturbing matter, the death penalty, which will be reflected in a truly free vote.



INDIAN CLAIMS COMMISSION


Mr. J. E. Walker (York Centre) moved:: That the joint committee of the Senate and the House of Commons, established Tuesday, June 22, 1965, to consider Bill C-123, an act to provide for the disposition of Indian claims, be composed in so far as the House of Commons is concerned, of the following Members: Messrs. Brewin, Basford, Blouin, Brown, Godin, Gundlock, Howard, Mrs. Konantz, Laprise, Legault, Patterson, Rheaume, Stefanson and Watson (Chateauguay-Huntingdon-Laprairie).


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I think there must be a slight error. We should be glad to have two Members on that committee but I think we are only entitled to one, and our appointee is the hon. Member for Skeena (Mr. Howard). The name of the hon. Member for Greenwood (Mr. Brewin) appears on that list. He would be glad to serve. He might not be an Indian, but he could be a chief.


James Edgar Walker: Mr. Speaker, if the House is prepared to let the names stand as they are, a substitution will be made later if there is an error.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

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

Mr. Laprise: Does the government intend to increase funds for expansion of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation services, so that the Chapais-Chibougamau and Clova-Parent areas will be adequately served?


Hon. Maurice Lamoniagne (Secretary of State):: There are already included in the current budget of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation capital sums for the extension of C.B.C. facilities in various areas of the country. Further consideration to this program will only be made by the Government when it has received and studied the report of the committee on broadcasting.
June 23, 1965


WALSH ADVERTISING COMPANY
Mr. Aiken: 1.	On what date was Walsh Advertising Company Limited awarded the Canadian Army recruiting account?
2.	Did Army recruiting officers have authority to charge advertisement to this company?
3.	What other government accounts have been awarded to Walsh Advertising Company Limited since April 22, 1963 and on what dates?
4.	What was the value of each account awarded by the government to this company since April 22, 1963?
5.	What precautions were taken by the government to see that the accounts for advertisements published on behalf of the Government of Canada were paid?
6.	Has the government held back any funds to protect the public against bankruptcy of this company?
7.	With what officers of the company did the government deal in these matters?


Maurice Lamontagne: 1. The R.C.A.F. recruiting advertising account was awarded to the Walsh Advertising Company Ltd. on 2 July 1963.
2.	R.C.A.F. recruiting unit personnel were authorized to request specific recruiting advertising services of a local supplier on an R.C.A.F. approved agency order form. The agency issued a confirmation order to the supplier and were responsible for paying suppliers' invoices.
3.	None.
4.	1963/64, $161,300; 1964/65, $157,000.
5.	Complaints received by the R.C.A.F. with regard to any delay in payment by the agency to suppliers are referred to the agency with a request that prompt payment be made.
6.	No.
7.	Primarily with Mr. R. Madden although on occasion, other executive, creative and accounting personnel were involved.


C.B.C. COLOUR TELEVISION AT EXPO '67
Mr. Mather: In planning the C.B.C. facilities at EXPO, what is being considered respecting colour television?


Mr. J. B. Stewart (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that it is planned to equip the television studios of the broadcast studio at Expo '67 and the mobile units for colour television.


AUTO FERRY SERVICE, PORT HOOD, N.S.-P.E.I.
Mr. Macquarrie: 1.	Have representations been received from the Eastern Kings Board of Trade of Souris, PE.I. in reference to studying the feasibility of establishing 22620-1791
Questions
an auto ferry service between Port Hood, N.S. and a port in Eastern Prince Edward Island?
2.	From what other bodies have similar representations been received?
3.	What is the nature of the reply given?
4.	Is the Atlantic Development Board, or is any branch or department of the Dominion Government, undertaking such a feasibility study?
5.	If not, is such a study contemplated?


Mr. Jean-Charles Caniin (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport):: 1. Yes.
2.	A joint submission by the Port Hood Development Council and the Mabou Development Council.
3.	It was pointed out that the Department was already heavily committed in expenditures for additional ferries between Cape Breton and Newfoundland and was building a new ferry for the Prince Edward Island service. Under these circumstances, it was difficult to entertain the possibility of making further immediate commitments for ferry services in this area.
4.	No.
5.	This question of a study is under consideration.


AUTO FERRY SERVICE, P.E.I.-WESTERN CAPE BRETON ISLAND
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
1.	Has the government, or any member of the government, received a communication from the Port Hood Development Council and the Mabou Development Council in reference to the establishment of an automobile ferry service between Prince Edward Island and western Cape Breton Island?
2.	Is it the intention of the government to give support to the expressions contained in this communication?
3.	Is the government prepared to work in conjunction with the governments of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island in the making of the necessary survey which is essential to the establishment of the aforementioned automobile ferry service?


Jean-Charles Cantin: 1. Yes.
2.	The question of a study is under consideration.
3.	The Provincial Governments would be consulted in the event of a survey being undertaken.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-LOURDES, N.S. STATION FACILITIES
Mr. MacEwan: 1.	Is it the intention of the Canadian National Railways to construct new station facilities in the Lourdes area between New Glasgow, N.S. and Stellarton, N.S., during the year 1965-66?
2.	If so, when will tenders be called?

June 23, 1965
Questions


Jean-Charles Cantin: The Management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
1.	No.
2.	N/A.


PORTS OF HALIFAX AND SAINT JOHN-LOSS OF TRAFFIC
Mr. Bell: Has the government any program or plan to compensate the ports of Halifax and Saint John for the loss of 200 thousand tons of traffic annually due to winter navigation on the St. Lawrence River, as stated in the Annual Report of the Maritimes Transportation Commission last week?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I have the following information from the Atlantic Development Board in answer to this question.
The Board received a report last year from a firm of private consultants in which it was estimated that improved winter navigation on the St. Lawrence River was leading to a loss of roughly 200 thousand tons of traffic annually to the ports of Saint John and Halifax.
As part of its general program to improve the economic conditions of the two ports, the government has initiated a series of studies and has undertaken a number of substantive measures. Thus, the Atlantic Development Board has studies in progress on the possibilities of increasing grain shipments, on the
feasibility of establishing a container shipping service; and on the desirability of establishing an industrial park or parks in the Halifax-Dartmouth metropolitan area. The National Harbours Board has commissioned a series of studies on the origin and destination of traffic through the ports of Halifax and Saint John. Concretely, the Federal Government is aiding in the construction of the Saint John harbour bridge and the National Harbours Board is building a new marine leg for the more efficient handling of grain at Halifax.


RESIGNATIONS FROM CENTENNIAL COMMISSION
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 639-Mr. Webb: (Supplementary)
1.	Among personnel earning $5,000 per annum or more in the Centennial Commission (a) how many resignations have been received since January, 1965, (b) how many have been accepted, and (c) how many have not been accepted?
2.	What are the names and reasons for resigning given by all Centennial Commission employees referred to in part 1?
3.	Are Sam Cormier, Les Maiden, William McDonald, C. F. Prevey and Robert Hume employed by the Centennial Commission, giving in each case the salary received, the position occupied and, if required, the date and reason for resignation?
4.	What position does R. L. Elliott occupy with the Centennial Commission, giving salary, brief description of duties, date of commencing employment, and previous experience relevant to employment with the Commission?
Maurice Lamontagne: 1. (a) Three; (b) three; (c) none.
2. Name A. J. Cormier
Robert M. Hume
J. Seguin
Reason given
To accept the position of chief of the liaison division in the Canadian Citizenship Branch of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.
The fact that the Centennial Commission visual arts program was assuming a considerably smaller role than was previously hoped is one determined by the Commission with careful consideration. The participation of the Commission would henceforth be minor, and the responsibility for programming, something less than could be justified under the duties of an administrative officer 8.
To accept a higher position (administrative officer 6) in the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, to be reinstated in the Civil Service and to obtain a more diverse experience.
CMr. MacEwan.]
June 23, 1965

3. Name
Sam Cormier-resigned April 22, 1965
Les Maiden-yes
William McDonald-resigned December 14, 1964
C. F. Prevey-yes
Robert Hume-resigned March 31, 1965
Questions
Salary Position and Reason for Resignation
$15,300 Chief Cultural Division-see reason given in answer to 2.
$13,800 Project Officer, Confederation trains and Caravan.
$14,050 Chief Ceremonials Division-The position had been accepted because there were certain areas of planning envisaged for which he believed his past training and personal interest rendered him particularly useful. The situation has been changed with the result that the work for which he was responsible no longer required the specific background of knowledge which he possesses. The future program of work forecast for the Chief of the Ceremonials Division did not include those elements upon which he wished to base his final working years.
$15,300 Financial adviser and Director of Administration.
$12,300 Visual Arts Officer-see reason given in answer to 2.
4.	Director, Planning Branch, at a salary of $20,150. His duties: To assess and evaluate centennial proposals; to plan a co-ordinated program of national projects; to implement approved projects. He commenced employment June 24, 1963. His application for the position indicated (a) 11 years service in the following departments of the Federal Government: Secretary of State, Reconstruction and Supply, Resources and Development, Public Works.
(b)	Experience over 4J years as executive director, Royal Architectural Institute of Canada.
(c)	Three years as a member of the Board of Directors, Canadian Centenary Council and chairman of the Council's program research committee.


AIR CANADA-NASSAU-TORONTO SERVICE
Mr. Nugent: 1.	On Air Canada flights between Nassau and Toronto, are economy passengers required to pay for beer brewed in Canada at 35 cents in Canadian funds, but if paid in U.S.A. currency at 25 cents and, if so, for what reason?
2.	Are similar differentials in prices followed on other routes flown by Air Canada?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The Management of Air Canada advise as follows:-
1.	No. Economy passengers are charged 30 cents Canadian or 25 cents U.S. for beer on
flights between Nassau and Toronto. All minimum charges, including the price of tickets and other services, agreed to under International Air Transport Association traffic conference resolutions are based on U.S. currency.
All carriers are required to relate the prices charged in the currency of collection, to not less than the U.S. currency equivalent. Air Canada converts this minimum to the U.S. dollar equivalent rounded to the next higher 5 cents to eliminate the necessity of making change in coppers. The origin of the product sold has no bearing on adherence to this regulation.
2.	Yes, if international, and flown under IATA Conference resolution agreement.


SOCIAL SECURITY CARD
Mr. McIntosh: 1.	Is the Social Security Card, now in use, about to be replaced by one which will remove the Coat of Arms and substitute the Maple Leaf?
2.	If so, is this being done because of objections to the Canadian Coat of Arms being on the present card and if not, why is the change being made?
3.	To produce the new plates are special machines being imported from the United States of America and, if so, at what cost?


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of Labour):: 1.	Yes. The card has been redesigned with a maple leaf superimposed by the word

June 23/ 1965
Questions
"Canada" in place of the federal coat of arms.
2.	No. The change is being made in order to provide a national symbol equally appropriate for programs under either Federal or Provincial jurisdiction.
3.	Yes. Machines required for embossing the new plastic social insurance number cards are not available in Canada. They are therefore being imported from the United States on a rental basis. The cost on this basis is estimated at $15,686 per month for six months and $9,479 for a further six months.


NORTH SYDNEY, N.S.-RAILWAY TRACKS ON WHARF
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
Is it the intention of the government to instal railway tracks on the new public wharf at North Sydney, N.S.?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The possibility of bringing a track to this wharf is being investigated.


CLAYTON STRATTON-CONNECTION WITH ASSAULTS
Mr. Howard: 1.	Since January 1, 1959 did one Clayton Stratton (Statton) enter Canada and, if so, for each such entry what was the date thereof and the length of time that the said gentleman remained in Canada?
2.	Was he ever barred from entry to Canada and, if so, what are the details surrounding this?
3.	Has he ever been required to post or have posted a bond before he was permitted to enter Canada and, if so, what are the details of this?
4.	What was the date upon which one Richard Greaves was allegedly beaten or assaulted, which beating resulted in charges being laid against one Harold Chamberlain Banks?
5.	Did the R.C.M. Police conduct an inquiry into the said beating or assault and, if so, in the course of that inquiry did the R.C.M. Police discover the whereabouts of the said Clayton Stratton (Statton) at the time of the beating or assault and where was the said Mr. Stratton (Statton) at that time?


Maurice Lamontagne: I am informed by the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, and by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police as follows:
1.	There is no record in the Department of Citizenship and Immigration of one Clayton Stratton (Statton) having entered Canada since January 1, 1959. However, this Department's records show that Clayton Thomas Stratton was admitted to Canada as a landed immigrant from the United States at Vancouver Airport on March 25, 1957.

2.	The records of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration contain no indication that this man was ever barred from entry to Canada.
3.	There is no record in the Department of Citizenship and Immigration of this man having been required to post a bond.
4.	January 30th, 1960.
5.	Yes. Yes, Brownsville, Texas.


PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL LEAVING ARMED SERVICES
Mr. Rapp: How many (a) professional (b) other skilled personnel, have left the armed services by request or resignation, month by month, in the last two years?


Hon. Leo Cadieux (Associate Minister of National Defence):: In the figures listed below, "professionals" include officers holding medical, dental, engineering, architectural, law, divinity and pharmacist degrees. Skilled workers are group 4 tradesmen or group 3 tradesmen in those trades in which group 3 is the highest.
Month and Year	Professionals	SkilledMay	1963	6	112June	1963	11	103July	1963	9	124Aug.	1963	4	157Sept.	1963	6	119Oct.	1963	2	114Nov.	1963	2	98Dec.	1963	4	113Jan.	1964	5	132Feb.	1964	2	115March	1964	3	109Apr.	1964	1	118May	1964	5	165June	1964	8	151July	1964	5	144Aug.	1964	6	146Sept.	1964	17	193Oct.	1964	8	151Nov.	1964	3	186Dec.	1964	6	144Jan.	1965	4	195Feb.	1965	4	148March	1965	6	169Apr.	1965	5	125


R.C.M.P. COMMISSIONER McCLELLAN
Mr. Fisher: 1.	On what date did R.C.M.P. Commissioner G. McClellan join the force?
2.	On what dates was he promoted through the various classes of constable, to corporal to sergeant, to inspector?
June 23/ 1965



3.	At each of these stages, in what aspect of the force's work did he serve and at what locations?


Mr. D. S. Macdonald (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, the answers to this three part question are as follows:
1.	August 15, 1932.
2.	Promoted to 2nd Class Constable, February 15, 1933; 1st Class Constable, February 15, 1934; Corporal, November 1, 1938; Sergeant, January 1, 1939; Sub-Inspector, February 1, 1939; Inspector, February 1, 1941.
3.	While 2nd Class Constable: General police and criminal investigation duties at Westlock, Alberta.
While 1st Class Constable: General police and criminal investigation-Westlock, Edson, Red Deer, St. Paul, Sylvan Lake, Edmonton, all in Alberta. At Halifax, Meteghan River, Liverpool and again in Halifax, Nova Scotia.
While Corporal:	Criminal Investigation
Branch-Halifax, Nova Scotia.
While Sergeant: Criminal investigation and security investigation, Halifax and throughout Nova Scotia.
While Sub-Inspector: Training Instructor, Regina, Saskatchewan. Officer in charge security and intelligence, Vancouver, B.C. Officer in charge wartime security and intelligence for western Ontario stationed at Toronto, Ontario.
While Inspector: Officer in charge security and intelligence duties for western Ontario, stationed at Toronto. Officer in charge Criminal Investigation Branch and 2nd in command "O" Division, Toronto, Ontario. Officer Commanding Saskatoon Sub-Division, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Director, Special Branch (security and intelligence) for the force, Headquarters, Ottawa, Ontario.


R.CAf.P. RECRUITS TAKEN IN AT RANK OF SERGEANT
Mr. Fisher: 1.	In the past ten years, has the R.C.M.P. taken on any officers at the rank of sergeant or above?
2.	If so, who are they and what were their qualifications?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: 1. No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


SECURITY FOR WORLD FAIR ADVANCES
Mr. Smith: 1. Has, or does, the government propose to take any security on the physical assets of the Canadian Corporation for the 1967 World Exhibition for the advances, estimated at $105,000,000 which the Corporation is to borrow from the government for
Questions
the purpose of building and operating Expo '67 at Montreal?
2. Has there been, since the original so-called master plan was made, any revision in the estimate of cost and revenues of Expo '67 and, if so, what are these estimates?


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: The Government has not made any advances to the Corporation and has not taken any security on the physical assets of the Corporation.
2.	The estimates of cost and revenues have been under constant review since December 1963 when the master plan for the Exhibition was submitted to and approved by the three governments. At this date, the revenues are estimated at $184,276,000 and the expenditures are estimated at $244,092,000. The net cost to the three governments sponsoring Expo '67 is placed at $59,816,000. Individual costs are thus estimated at $29,908,000 for the Federal Government, $22,431,000 for the Government of the Province of Quebec and $7,477,000 for the City of Montreal.


RESEARCH INTO WELFARE MANPOWER RESOURCES
Mr. Enns: 1.	Has a research project been undertaken by the Department of National Health and Welfare, in the current fiscal year, to determine how welfare manpower resources can be more effectively classified and used in the field of social welfare?
2.	If so, when is the report expected to be completed?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: 1. In 1952 the Department of National Health and Welfare carried out a survey to determine the distribution of welfare manpower resources across Canada and estimates of current and future needs of welfare agencies for welfare workers. In 1963 the commission on education and personnel of the Canadian Welfare Council made strong representations to have the Department conduct another such survey. Early in 1964, after an additional person was added to the staff, the Department agreed to undertake another survey.
2.	In 1964-65 the methodology for the survey was developed and the plan for analysing the data to be collected was completed. A series of questionnaires was devised and these were pretested with selected agencies. It was intended that the actual survey would be carried out in the fall of 1965. Most arrangements have already been made, although the participation of certain agencies has not yet been worked out. However, the project has had to be postponed since the research officer

June 23, 1965
Questions
primarily responsible for the project has left the Department. It may be revived when staff resources permit.


HIRING OF LAW STUDENTS FOR STATUTE REVISION
Mr. Woolliams: 1.	Is the Department ot Justice, on the recommendation of the Minister of Justice, intending to hire law students to investigate the Combines Investigation Act, or any other federal statute?
2.	If so, what are the names of these law students, what will their salary be, and what are their qualifications in years of standing at the university?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, the answer to the first part of the question is no. In each of the past several years, however, the Combines Branch has employed a small number of students from a representative group of Canadian universities as set out in the report of the Director of Investigation and Research, Combines Investigation Act, for the year ended March 31, 1964 at page 68.
In view of the answer to the first part of the question, the second part is not applicable.


PROSECUTIONS FOR ATTEMPTED SUICIDE
Mr. Fairweather: 1.	During the past 20 years how many prosecutions for attempted suicide have been instituted under the provisions of Section 213 of the Criminal Code?
2.	How many convictions were obtained?
3.	What was the average sentence imposed?


Mitchell William Sharp: 1. Information requested is not available.
2.	Prior to the revision of the Criminal Code in 1955, attempts to commit suicide were an indictable offence only. With the 1955 revision, attempts to commit suicide were changed to an offence punishable on summary conviction only.
No. of Convictions Attempted Suicide
October 1, 1942 to March 31, 1955	1,320
April 1, 1955 to December 31, 1962	1,595
3.	Information requested is not available.


TAX EXEMPTION, B.C. FREE ENTERPRISE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
Mr. Orlikow: Has the British Columbia Free Enterprise Education Association applied for tax exemption for contributions made to that organization and, if so
(a)	what reasons were given for this application
(b)	was the application granted?
[Miss LaMarsh.l


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of National Revenue):: (a) and (b) The Taxation Division of the Department of National Revenue has no record of any application from the British Columbia Free Enterprise Education Association to be recognized as a charitable organization for income tax purposes.


PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATIONS, POINT EDWARD NAVAL BASE
Mr. Maclnnis: 1.	Are shipwrights, carpenters and carpenter-joiners classified under the same trade at the Point Edward Naval Base?
2.	If so, on what date was reclassification carried out?
3.	Did Base Standing Orders show such reclassification and, if so, when?
4.	Does classification remain a factor in allocating personnel to positions at the Point Edward Naval Base?
5.	Are shipwrights, carpenters and carpenter-joiners classified under the same trade on defence establishments throughout Canada?
Hon. Leo Cadieux (Associate Minister of National Defence). 1. Yes.
2.	April 1, 1959.
3.	No.
4.	Yes.
5.	No.


DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURES BY EXHIBITION CORPORATION
Mr. Southam: With reference to expenditures by the Canadian World Exhibition Corporation, have there been instances when the Minister of Trade and Commerce has reduced or disallowed proposed expenditures and, if so, what was the date and the amount of money involved in each case of any such reduction or disallowance?


Mitchell William Sharp: The Corporation can only make expenditures within its budget as approved by the Treasury Boards of Canada and Quebec and in accordance with the master plan as approved and amended from time to time by the governor in council and the lieutenant governor in council of the Province of Quebec.
In the preparation of the budget and the master plan every effort is made both by the Corporation and the responsible governments to achieve economy consistent with a successful exhibition.
It has been necessary for many projects as originally conceived to be changed from time to time to fit the budget and for some of them to be eliminated entirely. Such changes are made by the Corporation either before or
June 23. 1965

after discussion with the responsible governments.
Various proposals for expenditure have had to be curtailed or eliminated after discussion with the Minister of Trade and Commerce, but under the administrative procedure that is followed it has not been necessary for the Minister to disallow expenditures or to direct the Corporation to reduce its expenditures.
DEBATES	2815
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley FEDERAL, EXPENDITURES ON ROADS TO RESOURCES. ATLANTIC PROVINCES


Mr. Dube: What were the amounts spent by the federal government on the Roads-to-Resources Program for each of the four Atlantic Provinces in the fiscal years ending March 31, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964 and 1965?


Hon. Arthur Laing (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Federal funds spent Fiscal year ending March 31, 1960 March 31, 1961 March 31, 1962 March 31, 1963 March 31, 1964 March 31, 1965
Newfoundland P.E.I.

750.000.	00
750.000.	00

Nova Scotia

900.000.	00
900.000.	00 460,920.46
New
Brunswick

750.000.	00
750.000.	00


JOINT SECRETARY, B AND B COMMISSION
Mr. Ricard: Is the Montreal lawyer, Paul Lacoste, still joint secretary to the Laurendeau-Dunton Commission and, if so, are his services retained on a parttime or a full-time basis?


John B. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, I have been informed by the Royal Commission on Biculturalism and Bilingualism as follows:
Yes: Mr. Paul Lacoste, a lawyer, of Montreal, is still co-secretary of the Laurendeau-Dunton Commission, working on a part time basis.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Mather: What was the amount, in dollars, of Department of National Defence contracts let, by provinces, in 1960, 1961, 1962. 1963, and 1964?


PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTION OF FEDERAL STATUTES
Mr. Malheson: 1.	How many copies of federal statutes are printed and distributed (a) in English, and (b) in French?
2.	What has been the cost to Treasury of printing (a) revised statutes, and (b) the annual statutes in English and French?
3.	Is the government examining the article of John D. Honsberger appearing in the Canadian Bar Review of May, 1965, on the subject of bilingualism in Canadian statutes?
[DOT] (3:10 p.m.)



AGRICULTURE


Mr. G. H. Doucelt (Lanark):: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave to move the adjournment of the House in accordance with Standing Order No. 26 in order to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely the distressing situation that has developed in large parts of Quebec and Ontario due to the worst drought in living memory, the resulting great drop in farm production, the forced selling of livestock due to lack of fodder which will seriously depress the entire Canadian livestock market, the extremely grave effect on farm income, and the failure of the Government to take any initiative to determine an immediate course of action to deal with this critical emergency.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is the hon. Member going to address the Chair on the question of urgency of debate?


George Henry Doucett: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I am sure that by this time many Members of the House of Commons realize the serious situation that exists throughout the Ottawa valley affecting the eastern part of Ontario and the western part of Quebec. Some counties are more seriously affected by the drought than others, but one fact that comes to our minds is that within the last few days farmers have found it necessary to dump a lot of
Return tabled.
June 23, 1965
2816	COMMONS DEBATES
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley unfinished cattle on the market, with the result that the sales barns in this area have been operating into the early hours of the morning in order to dispose of them at very depressed prices. In four adjacent counties in the Ottawa valley there are 258,600 head of cattle, and the farmers find that their fodder is becoming exhausted and they have to do something in a hurry.
The effect on the cattle population is not the only serious aspect. In the Ottawa valley area and the western part of the Province of Quebec there are some of the finest farmers in Canada. They have spent a lifetime, as their fathers did before them, in building up foundation stock, and now they find they are going to have to market stock which it will take them a lifetime to replace. We also find that the production of fruit and vegetables in this area has been reduced to a trickle, resulting in increased costs to the consumer and leaving the producers with very little income.
I think this matter is very urgent, Mr. Speaker, and that we should take immediate steps to see if we can do something to relieve the situation and help the farmers of this area to lay plans for the future. In today's paper I note that the farmers of this area who have suffered from drought for the last two years have found it necessary to purchase large amounts of fodder and to borrow from banks, which is an added burden on top of the mortgage payments that some of them have to make. According to the press they are asking that a freeze be placed on their mortgage payments so they can re-establish themselves.
I ask, Mr. Speaker, that this matter be given serious consideration.


Hon. G. J. Mcllrailh (President of the Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, dealing with the question of urgency of debate of this important matter arising out of the severe losses being incurred in the counties of Renfrew, Lanark, Pontiac and the adjacent territory, I would point out that there will be full opportunity to discuss this subject when we come to interim supply. I hope we will reach interim supply later today or on Friday. There will be a request then for a part of the estimates of the Department of Agriculture.
In any event, I have no wish to deny in any way the seriousness of the situation. I had occasion to see it at first hand over the last week end, and undoubtedly it is of a very serious nature. But what we are concerned with at the moment is whether we should set aside all of the business of the House at
this time in order to debate this question. I respectfully submit that we should follow the regular procedure and debate it when the opportunity arises to discuss agriculture either later today or on Friday.


Mr. Lambert:: Nonsense.


George James McIlraith: I know the hon. Member for Edmonton West thinks it is nonsense, but I submit the matter can be discussed on the agricultural estimates either later today or on Friday.


An hon. Member:: What about the address to the Queen?


George James McIlraith: As hon. Members know, assistance in this kind of disaster situation is usually given at the request of a province. Hon. Members will know that there was a request from Ontario for one measure of assistance which has been granted, but I believe I am correct in saying that no request has been made by the Government of the Province of Quebec with regard to this matter.


Mr. Arnold Pelers (Timiskaming):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to support the adjournment motion, and make a few remarks on the question of urgency. It is well known that in the Ottawa valley there has been a lack of moisture not only this year but last year, and that the situation is now critical. The fact that it is raining this afternoon means very little, because it will take a great deal of rain to overcome the drought of the last two years.
The Provincial Government has asked the Federal Government for assistance, and I hope the Federal Government will accept this motion today on the basis of doing something about the situation immediately. We have had some indication from Quebec Members in recent weeks with regard to the situation in the Lake St. John area, where rainmakers produced rain steadily for 67 days. If rain is to come in time to help crops in the Ottawa valley this year, 10 days is too long to wait for this operation to start. It should be started tomorrow. The Government can provide this kind of assistance today, and should not wait for any other request from the Province of Ontario.
I am not completely convinced that this rainmaking operation works, but the situation in the Ottawa valley is so desperate that I think it should be tried. It is also very desperate in Timiskaming. While the farmers there were able to produce a great deal of

June 23, 1965	COMMONS
hay in the last two years and supply a large amount to the farmers of the Ottawa valley, there will be no supply of hay available from that source this year. Many farmers in my constituency are going to have to sell their cattle and consider completely changing their way of life.
I think this matter is important enough to warrant the adjournment of the regular business of the House so the Government can take appropriate action this afternoon to help alleviate the desperate situation facing all farmers throughout the Ottawa valley.
[DOT] (3:20 p.m.)


Mr. H. A. Olson (Medicine Hal):: Mr. Speaker, we in this party recognize the critical nature of the drought that has been prevailing for the last several weeks in the Ottawa valley and adjacent territory. We believe this matter is important enough to set aside all other business and take some action to give assistance. However, the problem arises, Mr. Speaker, of what kind of assistance you are going to attempt to give. What would such a debate achieve? I draw Your Honour's attention to citation 100 of Beauchesne, paragraph 1, which says the adjournment must be for a purpose involving the administrative responsibility of the Government.
Now, unless we are going to change the pattern of providing assistance to farmers and others who are caught in disasters of this kind, we would have to wait on the initiative of the Province to set up some kind of emergency assistance program. The Province in turn would ask the Federal Government to pay a portion of the cost. This has always been done in the past. I recall in 1961, for example, when there was a widespread drought covering the three prairie provinces, assistance was given by the Federal Government. However, the program in each of the Provinces was initiated and administered by the local Provincial Government. The Federal Government was asked to pay a portion of the cost.
Then, Mr. Speaker, I should like to draw your attention to citation 100, paragraph 5, which says the adjournment of the House cannot be moved with reference to critical conditions prevailing generally in certain parts of the country. If we should rely on that rule, of course, the motion would be ruled completely out of order. After having seen a large portion of this area, I prefer to think the situation is sufficiently critical and important enough to occupy a day of
DEBATES	2817
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley debate in this House. Then the question comes up, what can we do?


An hon. Member:: Let us find out.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: An hon. Member says "Let us find out". The fact is that at this stage the situation does not involve any administrative responsibility of the Federal Government. If the Province had set up some kind of program and requested the co-operation or assistance of the Federal Government, and the Federal Government came to Parliament asking for funds to participate in the assistance program, then we would have something positive to debate. Unfortunately that is not the case at this moment.
Then citation 100, paragraph 3, defines "urgency" to some extent. It says that urgency within this rule applied under Standing Order 26 means urgency of debate. This, Mr. Speaker, is the aspect to which we have to confine our thinking. What are we going to do with the debate? We could have a general discussion. We could, perhaps, suggest many things the Federal Government could do if it moved into this area of providing this assistance. However, that has not been the practice in the past. Until the Governments of both Provinces come to the Federal Government asking for some assistance, it seems to me it would be rather difficult to formulate the kind of action that could properly be adopted.


Mr. W. H. Jorgenson (Provencher):: I should like to speak to the matter of urgency in reply to some of the statements that have been made by the President of the Privy Council and the hon. Member for Medicine Hat on the question of what can be done. We in western Canada well remember the serious drought that threatened that part of the country in 1961. Contrary to what the hon. Member for Medicine Hat has said, the initiative was taken by the Federal Minister of Agriculture at that time. On his initiative the various Provincial Ministers of Agriculture were called together to discuss a program of emergency action to be taken. There is no need at all to circumvent the constitution or to deny the right of the Provinces to take the initiative. All we are suggesting in this House is that the Federal Government take the initiative-


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: May I ask a question?


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: -as was done in the past, in discussing a program of action to meet this situation. If nothing else, the debate in this House may produce a Minister of Agriculture.
June 23, 1965

Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley


An hon. Member:: Where is the Minister?


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: It is quite obvious from the questions that have been asked in this House during the last few days that there is no plan of action; there is no program intended on the part of this Government.


An hon. Member:: There is no Minister.


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: There is a great need for the farmers to have the assurance that a program is available to them if the worst comes to the worst. During the drought year of 1961 a good part of the program developed was never needed, never put into effect, because the situation was alleviated by rainfalls later in the summer. However, there was a program ready to be put into effect if it had been needed. I suggest that this Government can take action, can take the initiative in cooperating with the Provinces in developing a program to meet this critical situation.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, we have before us today a motion to adjourn the business of the House to discuss the emergency caused by drought conditions in eastern Ontario and western Quebec.
When it is a question of helping farmers, I think it behooves the House to take the necessary steps to solve their problems.
In our area of Saguenay-Lake St. John, as in the Abitibi area, the problem is altogether different. We have too much rain; here, there is not enough.
If we adjourn the business of the House, will this afternoon's discussion be useful? We must first determine whether it is a definite matter of urgent public importance and, second, whether the discussion can be useful.
Is there any urgency? Of course, there is. Since the first part of this session is to end today or Friday. But the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Mcllraith) replies that we shall have full opportunity to discuss this matter during interim supply which may be called later today or on Friday. Now, I say to the President of the Privy Council that there are already several subjects he suggested we could take up during interim supply. There is the address submitted to the Queen of England by the province of Quebec, the Dorion report itself and the related leaks. Thus, there are several subjects to be discussed on interim supply, which means that there will be very little time left to discuss the serious problem of farmers who suffer

from drought. That would seem to confirm the urgency of a debate.
Now, the emergency of such a debate was proved a while ago. Moreover, another important aspect that needs consideration is that this would enable us to see the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) in the house. Indeed, we have the Minister of Forestry (Mr. Sauve) but not the Minister of Agriculture. If we could only succeed in bringing him to the house, it would be a tremendous help.
Now, what would be the usefulness of such a debate? That question was raised a while ago. It is obvious that requests on this matter must come from provincial governments and that the federal government takes appropriate action afterwards. This was not done but, on the other hand, the federal government has acted accordingly in other fields. The federal government could make decisions of its own as to the steps to be taken. For instance, here in the Ottawa valley, there were complaints about the lack of rain while, in our region, there were complaints for a long period about too much rain. The federal government, through the Minister of Transport (Mr. Pickersgill), took quite drastic steps so that, after many discussions concerning rainmaking machines, they were taken out of the Saguenay-Lake St. John district which has now enjoyed ten days of fine weather.
Now, that matter could be discussed here and we could suggest to the Minister of Transport to use his influence to have those rainmaking machines brought to Ottawa as fast as possible. The federal government could pass such a measure in order to end the drought and thus the misfortune of some people could bring happiness to others.
For all those reasons, I think it would be useful to discuss the situation. I believe it is an urgent problem and it is urgent to discuss it because we are now in the dying days of this first part of the session. I think you should authorize such a debate. It would give us an opportunity to discuss the situation of farmers who are now facing that serious problem in several regions. It would be useful for the whole country or, at least, for the farming community.
[DOT] (3:30 p.m.)


Mr. J. J. Greene (Renfrew South):: Mr. Speaker, first of all may I say this situation is sufficiently serious that I trust the House will not let it go by the board on the question of semantics or the reading of fine type as to whether or not we should have a debate. The
June 23. 1965

important thing is that these farmers find themselves in a critical condition.
I spent most of yesterday with the provincial Minister of Agriculture-


Mr. Nielsen:: Where is your Minister?


John James Greene: This is properly a matter for provincial initiative. The provincial Minister of Agriculture saw fit to look into this problem yesterday, and thought it sufficiently important and critical that he has made an announcement stating that in spite of the very hazardous nature of the proceedings he deems it worth while to take a 20 to 1 chance and bring in rainmaking equipment at an expenditure of $200,000. If the province is willing to spend $200,000 on a 20 to 1 shot, surely this indicates the critical nature of the situation.
There has been only .42 inches of rain this past month, and it is the most serious drought in 75 years. The provincial Minister of Agriculture agreed that the county of Renfrew was the worst hit in the Province of Ontario, and if this is not serious then I do not know what is, so far as it affects my people, my county and my province.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. I regret to interrupt the hon. Member, and I see other Members want to take part in the debate, but perhaps they will have an opportunity to do so in a few minutes.
The Chair has listened with great interest to the motion proposed by the hon. Member for Lanark (Mr. Doucett). There is no doubt whatever that he has raised a matter of serious and immediate importance. It is a matter of great urgency, and I suggest to hon. Members that there is also urgency of debate.
The President of the Privy Council (Mr. Mcllraith) had, I believe, a very serious argument when he suggested that there will be an opportunity to discuss this matter in a short while and said that perhaps later this afternoon, or on Friday, or at the start of next week there will be interim supply. But as has been pointed out, rightly, by the hon. Member for Lapointe (Mr. Gregoire), there are a number of subjects already assigned for debate during interim supply, and in view of the extreme urgency of the matter raised by the hon. Member for Lanark the Chair proposes to submit the motion to the House.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The hon. Member for Lanark (Mr. Doucett), seconded by the hon.

Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley Member for Nicolet-Yamaska (Mr. Vincent) asks leave-
-to move the adjournment of this House in accordance with Standing Order 26, in order to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely, the distressing situation that has developed in large parts of Quebec and Ontario due to the worst drought in living memory, the resulting great drop in farm production, the forced selling of livestock due to lack of fodder which will seriously depress the entire Canadian livestock market, the extremely grave effect on farm income, and the failure of the Government to take any initiative to determine an immediate course of action to deal with this critical emergency.
The hon. Member for Lanark, seconded by the hon. Member for Nicolet-Yamaska moves:
That this House do now adjourn.


George Henry Doucett: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank you for this opportunity. As already pointed out, this condition is one of the most serious that has occurred in this community during the last three quarters of a century.
The rainfall during the past crop season has been less than needed. There are grave circumstances facing the farmers. The area affected covers a great many different types of farmers. In Renfrew county it is mostly cattle raising and dairy farming and the dairy industry has certainly suffered.
One farmer told me yesterday that he was about to put in a milk cooler, but in view of present conditions he wondered if it would be necessary for him to instal it. Many of the farmers with dairy cattle in this area have already fed them what surplus feed was left from last year, and now find their pastures are becoming totally depleted. As I mentioned just a few minutes ago, at the time of the 1961 census the cattle population in the four counties adjacent to the Ottawa River totalled some 260,000 to 270,000. Many of them are dairy cattle. Many farmers have young stock coming along and, due to the shortage of pasture fodder, something will have to be done to alleviate their plight.
Farmers are taking unfinished feeders to the sales barns, which are overloaded, and according to one newspaper I notice that at Cobden and in Perth last week they continued selling cattle until the early hours of the morning.
Finished cattle at the present time are selling in the neighbourhood of 25 cents a pound. Considering the farmers' machinery costs and their capital investment, the return is not too much. According to reports, some of the cattle that have been dumped on the market because of lack of feed have been
June 23. 1363
2820	COMMONS
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley sold at ridiculously low prices, some even as low as 13 cents or 14 cents a pound.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)
It is hardly necessary to point out that in such circumstances a farmer would certainly find himself in a drastic financial condition. It takes a number of years to lay the foundation for a herd. Cattle which he purchased two years ago most probably cost more than he can get for them at present, and this creates a drastic situation. During the last few years many young farmers have bought farms at reasonable prices and equipped them with stock and machinery. In 1963 and again in 1964 they found it necessary to buy feed for their stock. They had to borrow from the banks, and now they find themselves in a desperate situation, obliged to dispose of their stock at prices far below their value. Their output of dairy products is extremely limited; they are finding it necessary to buy meal, and cannot see their way clear to repay their loans to the bank, plus the interest on those loans. Yet if they fail they face the loss of their mortgages.
I do not think I need emphasize to you, Mr. Speaker, the great plight which the agricultural community is facing. Of course we hope to get rain immediately. That would help to bring on a second crop. It would help the grain. But whether we do or not, a degree of damage has already been done which cannot be repaired. Every one of these farmers will find himself in a difficult financial position this fall; he will find himself obliged to make severe readjustments in order to remain solvent.
This is why I have brought the present motion before the House. I want to see what can be done to establish confidence among these people, who laid the foundation for this great country of ours. I want to let them know that their representatives throughout Canada are thinking of them and are willing to give every assistance so as to tide them over this distressing situation. I believe others will wish to speak on this subject. This is a situation which I am sure we all regret. It is one which can be solved by co-operation and by putting our shoulders to the wheel.


John James Greene: Ottawa Valley members on both sides of the House have for some weeks been drawing this situation to the attention of the House. As time went by the problem facing our farmers became more critical.
It is true, as was stated by the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Mcllraith), that


according to strict constitutional procedure we have to await provincial initiative either from Ontario or from Quebec, which is also affected, before federal action can be undertaken in the normal course. But I do not think that because this has been the practice in the past a pattern need be set for the future. Some hon. Members may agree that in the past two, three or five years there has possibly been too great a tendency to await provincial action in circumstances such as these. From my own limited knowledge of constitutional law it seems that if anything is of sufficient moment to affect the national well-being there is constitutional authority for independent government action at the federal level whether or not it is a provincial matter in its original aspect.
This drought, I suggest, is of such consequence that it will affect the national wellbeing. It will affect food prices. Already there are cries of complaint from consumers. Food prices affect the nation as a whole and this being the case I suggest, with respect, that we at Federal level should consider action in this regard.
The Federal Department of Agriculture is convinced that the rain making program is a very long shot. I think today's newspapers say it is a 20 to 1 shot. The provincial Department of Agriculture considers the situation so grave that it is willing to spend $200,000 on a 20 to 1 shot. I know the Dominion Meteorologist doubts the validity of claims for rain making equipment. Well, I believe the hon. Member for Lapointe (Mr. Gregoire) and some of his colleagues have been complaining that rain making equipment is only too effective. If there is any chance whatever, be it 20 to 1 or a 100 to 1, I hope the federal Department of Agriculture will see its way clear to participate in the rain making venture, in view of the severity of drought conditions in the Ottawa Valley.
This is one facet of the help we can give at federal level to farmers in their desperate plight at the present time. It is not merely a case of a drought this year only, nor is it a case of drought both this year and last year, as the hon. Member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters) suggested. As far as the farmers of Renfrew County and the Ottawa Valley generally are concerned, this is the fourth year in which they have suffered severe loss through drought.
It seems to me we could take action at the federal level in connection with matters which are properly within the federal ambit, and that such action would be of considerable
June 23, 1965	COMMONS
help to the farmers in their present need. First, we could bring in moratorium legislation with respect to Farm Credit Corporation mortgages, and farm loans of all types, in any way supported by the federal Government. This would have application to loans under the machinery syndicates legislation, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation loans, and so on. This general area is within the federal ambit of jurisdiction. There should be a moratorium with respect to principal and interest on mortgages pending the alleviation of drought conditions.
Banking and interest are within the ambit of the federal authority. Most of the farmers affected have had to borrow heavily from the banks in order to carry on last year and this year. It is our duty to see to it that our farmers are not strangled out of existence, and we can help do this by relieving them of interest payments and payments on debts.
I am sure that in conjunction with the chartered banks we can make some arrangement whereby farmers will not be squeezed out of existence because this year they will not be able to pay interest on bank loans or make repayments of principal.
[DOT] (3:50 p.m.)
I also wish to point one other thing. I have suggested that the Federal Government should take the initiative as this is a national crisis. I have suggested that they should participate with the Province of Ontario in the rain making program, which quite properly was initiated by the province; that was the proper venue in which a measure such as this should be initiated. I have suggested that we should gladly, willingly and eagerly participate in this program irrespective of the technical opinion of the Dominion Meteorologist, because if there is any chance it is a chance worth taking. As I pointed out, there has been .42 of an inch of rain in the past month and this is the worse drought in 75 years. Last night some of us had the opportunity to meet with the members of the Farmers Union, who brought these critical difficulties very forcibly to our attention. In particular, Mr. Powers, the Vice President of the Union, pointed out the difficult situation in the Valley, as he comes from Beachburg in the Ottawa Valley, and I think he made a suggestion which it is my responsibility to draw as forcibly as I can to the attention of the House for the solution of this matter. As he pointed out, with which views I agree wholeheartedly, even if our rain making
DEBATES	2821
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley program is successful at this time-which I hope we will participate in-and even if we do take these very proper measures to alleviate the farmer from the pressure of his current debts, as I suggested earlier, there is one further program that is most necessary and that we should initiate here.
As evidence of the situation that the hon. Member for Temiskaming (Mr. Peters) referred to earlier, namely the fact that last year there was a drought of catastrophic proportions in this area, we co-operated with the provincial Department of Agriculture of Ontario and instituted emergency measures by way of freight assistance in transporting cattle to market and by way of subsidy on hay imported into this area. This year there is no point in speaking of a subsidy with respect to the importation of hay, because the drought is so critical in other parts of the Province of Ontario-and I may say that this is not a unique area; in the great State of New York this year they are suffering a drought which I think is as critical and as serious as ours. Generally there just is no hay. Therefore a program of subsidizing the importation of hay into this area just is not feasible, but forage is very badly needed. As has been earlier pointed out, the farmer is in the position right now of having to sell at sacrifice prices cattle that should be sold much later, because he fears that even though he may be able to feed them right today, there will be no feed this fall with which to winter his cattle. Hay is not available. I am not a technical man but I certainly feel for the farmers in their desperate plight as sincerely and as deeply as I could if I had the necessary technical knowledge. There may be a good many solutions that are perfect and absolute here, but I know that with the technical abilities we have in the Department of Agriculture we can suggest a system of subsidized forage whereby we will be able to get the forage into this area on a basis of help and subsidy if need be. It cannot be hay; it must be some other type of forage, as hay is not available.
I think this is a desperate and dark hour in the lives of these people, most of whom have lived in this area of eastern Ontario for many generations. I do not think these are people who come running to Government every time something gets a little tough. I do not think they come to us on their knees, and they never will, because these are proud people. But I do suggest that if we have any function here whatsoever it surely is to see to it that we use every
June 23. 1965
2822	COMMONS
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley measure and every available facet of governmental action that is available to us in order to alleviate this desperate situation of the farmers of eastern Ontario.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, I think the House should be appreciative of the fact that the hon. Member for Lanark (Mr. Doucett) brought forward this motion so that this matter could be discussed. Before discussing it I would like to point out something that I think should be apparent to everyone. There is no Minister of Agriculture here. His Parliamentary Secretary is not here. That man who acts as the eastern representative of agriculture and makes so many silly statements, the Minister of Forestry is not here. The Acting Prime Minister is not here. The man that has been left to make this decision is a man who has aspirations for the Ontario leadership of the party and who appears to be given the leadership in this field. I think this is a disgrace.
I think there are solutions to this problem.
I was aware that it happened two years ago. The hon. Member representing the riding of Renfrew says it has been a factor for four years. Therefore the federal Department of Agriculture must have known that there was going to be a serious problem and these people should be here this afternoon to accept or reject some of the suggestions made by the Members. If this is not done, I am prepared to move an adjournment motion, because this discussion will serve no purpose at all. I think the farmers in the Renfrew area have the right to expect the federal Government to give some leadership to them, but there is in this House no one who can accept suggestions made by Members. I don't know what the country will think about it, but I am sure they are going to ask, "Is the Minister of Agriculture out selling the cattle that have been forced on to the market in the last few days, causing a surplus of cattle?" But the Minister is not here and is not responsible enough to have somebody here speaking for his department.
I think there is a federal responsibility in this matter and some Minister is going to have to get up and indicate what they are going to do about it. No wonder the Government wanted to oppose this motion this afternoon; they have no intention of even listening to us. The farmers deserve a better deal than that, because these farmers are faced with a serious plight. We will go on and discuss the problem, although it is not going


to do a damned bit of good, because there is nobody here to listen and this Government is not interested.
I look at the Renfrew Advance. They have pointed out a number of times in recent days how serious is this problem, and in the last issue of June 10 the headline is, "Drought ... Conditions worst in 25 years". This article goes on to say:
Area farmers are facing the worst drought to hit the Ottawa Valley in 25 years. Rains predicted for Monday evening turned out to be only scattered showers and many areas did not receive any moisture. Eganville was one area that had more rain than most places but even there the situation remains grave.
The Renfrew Mercury, another Ottawa Valley newspaper, headlines the story, "Shortage of rain may cause extensive losses in county". This article goes on to say:
Renfrew County farmers could be faced with massive crop failures this year if rain does not come within the next few days, it was learned this week.
This has been known for some time. I wonder whether the Member for Renfrew South (Mr. Greene) and the Member for Renfrew North (Mr. Forgie) have not brought this matter to the attention of the Government, and this is why there is not someone here that can get up and say what the federal Government is prepared to do in this situation.


John James Greene: On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker, inasmuch as the hon. Member has seen fit to single out the Member for Renfrew North and myself, may I say-and I think it is my duty to say it-that we have been bringing this matter to the attention of the Minister and the department for the past three weeks at least, and quite properly have been instructed by them that they could take no initiative in this connection until a request came from the Provincial Government; and in spite of urging from this end, the Government of the Province of Ontario, who had the initiative, saw fit to do nothing until yesterday when they suggested bringing in rain making equipment.


Mr. Vincent:: What about the Province of Quebec?


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, I will accept the point of privilege made and will withdraw the inference which the hon. Member took out of my remarks, which inference I did not intend. The inference I intended to make is that they have not been able to persuade
June 23, 1965	COMMONS
the Government to take any action, and that no one here is prepared to take any action.
[DOT] (4:00 p.m.)
I note that the Acting Minister of Agriculture for eastern Canada is in the House. Perhaps he is in a position to say what the Federal Government will do. But I am not prepared to accept the remarks of the last speaker, who implied that if the Provincial Government is not willing to do anything, then the Federal Government is not in a position to do anything. That is not correct. We should be in a position to do something.
I do not think the Quebec Government arranged for those rain-makers in the St. Johns area. The Quebec Government had one heck of a time getting rid of them. The Federal Government had the right to continue this experiment by applying to the Government of Ontario to move the rain-makers to the Ottawa Valley, rather than to hire an outside firm from Colorado, not yesterday, as the hon. Member suggested, but three days ago at a cost of $100,000.
It is the responsibility of the Federal Government to take action in fields over which they have jurisdiction. The Federal Government could report to Parliament and ask it to consider the necessary steps. What is the point of our making a plea on behalf of these farmers if the Government Members intend to sit here until five o'clock, at which time the whole matter will drop. I do not think that is a fair attitude to take in relation to the plight of the farmers in this area.
We have also heard the suggestion that loans be made to the farmers in the area. I am not in favour of providing loans to the farmers in the Ottawa Valley, because they are now faced with a situation which, in my opinion, has continued into this year from last year. These farmers have spent all the money they have accumulated over the years as a result of this disastrous situation. These people have had to sell their beef cattle, which usually brings 25 cents a pound on the market, at a sacrifice price of an average of 14 cents a pound. This has also resulted in the loss of their potential breeding stock. These farmers will be in considerable difficulty for a considerable length of time before they build their herds back up to that position they were in before the disaster struck. By giving them loans we are only going to burden them again with payments that they will not be able to make.
We are not asking the Government to give the farmers loans. More drastic steps than

Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley that are required to deal with this situation. Many things could be suggested in the way of helping these farmers. A great deal of the hay that was bought by the farmers in the Ottawa Valley last year came from my area, and much of that hay had been stored in barns for four, five and six years. Those supplies have been pretty well depleted. There are many areas in my part of the country which can carry 10,000 or 12,000 head of cattle. We might provide a solution to part of the problem if the Federal Government was prepared to facilitate the moving of the cattle.
The Federal Government now operates a community pasture in the Earlton area, and I am quite sure that the farmers who are not using a great deal of the grazing land in that area would be willing to make reasonable arrangements for the pasturing of a large part of the cattle of this area, provided the Federal Government would assist in moving them in. I do not know whether that would be a good idea or not, but it is a suggestion. Perhaps the agricultural representative in the Renfrew area could get together with the agricultural representative in my area and work out some arrangement. Perhaps some arrangements could be made to allow the farmers of the Ottawa Valley area to go into the area around Earlton to cut hay at a reasonable rate. Much of this hay was not cut last year and would not be cut this year under normal circumstances. I am sure there are several thousand acres of hay which will not be cut this year unless some such arrangements are made.
There are many things this Government could do which would not cost very much money, but if they have no intention of helping the farmers in these disastrous circumstances, then obviously we are wasting our time by continuing this discussion. If the general public in the Ottawa Valley find that this Government is as callous as it appears to be, they will not only look seriously at the grain and hay situation in the Renfrew area, but will look at the cost of fruits and vegetables right here in Ottawa in the Byward market. They will find that strawberries, which are not worth buying, will be selling at 75 cents a basket. They will wonder about this situation, and why the Federal Government did not examine it and do something about it.
This disaster will not only have an effect on the farmers of this area but also on the housewives who buy fruits and vegetables which will not be produced in any quantity this
June 23, 1965
2824	COMMON!
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley year. One of the members of the protective staff in this building spoke to me this morning and told me that a friend of his has five acres in strawberries but will not get enough this year to put into his freezer for his own home use, yet last year he found it difficult hiring enough help to pick the strawberries from that same five acres.
We have heard a lot of facetious remarks about rain making in Quebec. There was a group of individuals visiting this House yesterday attempting to make rain of a different kind. I am not prepared to say that one can make rain. I am not prepared to argue that you cannot seed clouds and create a certain amount of precipitation. I am certainly not in a position to tell you whether or not this method works on a grandiose scale and can produce rain for 67 consecutive days, just with a couple of machines in the countryside. On the other hand, I am not prepared to say that we should not investigate this and decide whether it does work.
If this situation continues in the Ottawa Valley, I am sure the ARDA program will have to be used in respect of almost all the farms in the Renfrew area. The wealth of these farmers has never been great enough to allow these farmers to survive two or three successive crop failures. If something is not done in respect of this disaster, these people will be moving off these farms into other areas next year. This is a critical situation and the federal Government has an obligation right now to do whatever it can to relieve the plight of these people, even if it is only through a pseudo-hypothetical means.
The hon. Member for Quebec suggested that no matter what is done about this problem, these farmers are not going to have a June hay crop; but as the hon. Member for Lanark (Mr. Doucett) stated, the farmers may be able to harvest a second crop this fall which will at least help solve the problem.
I do not know whether there is anything more I can add to this discussion. I am very sympathetic to the farmer, but I should like to warn both the farmers and the Members of this House not to consider adopting a system of providing loans to these farmers, because all that will do is bankrupt the farm communities in the Ottawa Valley. I am in complete agreement with what the hon. Member for Renfrew South (Mr. Greene) stated, that there should be some kind of a moratorium in respect of federal loans in the area directly affected by this disaster, and that could include all farm loans, veterans 

farm loans, farm improvement loans and loans made under all federal Government acts. There should be a one or two year moratorium in respect of the payments. I caution the Members of this House again not to adopt a system of loans to these farmers in this disaster area. These farmers paid 65 cents for a bale of hay in the Renfrew area last year. They cannot be expected to pay that price again this year and repay their loans. They have had to sell their cattle at sacrifice prices, but I believe that is even better than paying 65 cents a bale for hay.
[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)
The Federal Government should consider now the idea of moving equipment from other parts of Ontario to these grazing areas in order to cut this unused hay. That might be part of the solution to the problem. It might also consider assistance in respect of moving cattle to these areas. The effect of this disaster is not being felt only in the disaster area, but in other parts of the province. These people are selling their cattle at reduced prices and this is displacing the market in other areas. Surely some solution can be found to this problem. But I castigate the Government again for their lack of leadership and their lack of fortitude in looking for something they can do. It is all right for the hon. Member for Medicine Hat (Mr. Olson) to say that the book does not allow us to do this, but with respect to other things we are able to look for some way to get around the book if we want to do so.
We have had a resolution before us in recent days containing 19 allied items. If the Government had stuck in another one providing for the payment of $10 million to the Renfrew farmers because of the crop failure,
I am sure everybody would have said that we could not turn it down and there would have been no argument that we could not do it. It all depends on whether we want to do it.
I suggest it is the Government's role to give leadership. I think the Cabinet will find that Members of the Opposition are very sympathetic with regard to the problem faced by the farmers of the Ottawa valley and will give favourable consideration to any reasonable proposition that the Government will put forward. I think the Government should stand up now and make some suggestions that will be advantageous to the farmers of this area.
June 23, 1965	COMMONS


@Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Medicine Hat.


Mr. Horner (Acadia):: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member for Medicine Hat spoke against the very purpose of this debate when the question was under consideration as to whether or not a debate would serve a useful purpose in bringing about some assistance with regard to the drought conditions in the eastern part of Ontario. Surely we should not waste our time hearing him now when he was not even in favour of the debate. I think we should hear others who are willing and prepared to make some contribution toward helping to alleviate the drought conditions in the eastern counties of Ontario and the western counties of Quebec.


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: Instead of apologizing for the Government.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Order. The usual practice in a debate on such a motion is to complete one round so that one representative from each party in the House will be heard. The Chair saw the hon. Member for Medicine Hat. If it is the wish of the House that somebody else should speak, there is a procedure open to Members of the House.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Mr. Speaker,-


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: The Government's apologist.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: -in spite of the obviously ridiculous attempt by the hon. Member for Acadia (Mr. Horner) to raise a point of order, what I said earlier when the Speaker was considering whether the motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 26 should stand was that it seems to me we should have something positive to debate if we are going to spend the day debating the very serious situation in the Ottawa valley.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Drought conditions are positive enough.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: They are positive enough, but I should like to know what kind of action the Government intends to take with respect to this matter. If we are going to proceed in an orderly and proper way, it seems to me there should have been some suggestions from the Government as to what they intend to do.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: The Minister is not even here.
DEBATES	2825
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: In spite of what the hon. Member for Provencher (Mr. Jorgenson) said about the Federal Government initiating action to provide emergency assistance in 1961, I know that in Alberta the provincial Government-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: They dragged their feet.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: -and the Minister primarily concerned initiated and carried out the entire drought assistance program. That does not take anything away from the federal Government of that day because they acted quite properly in coming along and picking up part of the cost of that program. I certainly do not wish to downgrade the actions of the federal Government of that day.
Over the week end I spent a little time in the Arnprior area of Renfrew County and at points between there and Ottawa, and I know that the drought situation is very serious and calls for emergency action by both levels of government. There is no question about that. For the benefit of the hon. Member for Acadia, prior to the Speaker accepting this motion I said that I thought the situation was important and serious enough that it could quite properly occupy the attention of the House for a day or more. I went on to ask what we would be debating. The hon. Member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters) wanted to know what action is going to result from the debate we are now having. The hon. Member for Renfrew South (Mr. Greene) says he has been making representations to the federal Government for the last three weeks to try to get them to undertake some action to alleviate the situation. We do not have anything before the House yet, but at the same time the hon. Member says that the drought has been gradually building up over the last four years, that it was critical last year and that it is a complete disaster this year. Anyone who has been there and looked at the conditions agrees with him. Yet we find we have nothing before the House of which we can either approve or disapprove. So there is no program.
I wrote down a number of suggestions and I do not claim they are new. They have been tried in other areas where this kind of emergency has arisen. We need to have extensions, postponements, deferments, or whatever you want to call them, of payments under the Farm Improvement Loans Act, the Farm Credit Corporation, the Veterans Land Act and so on. The hon. Member for Timiskaming mentioned this point. This was done on the
2826	COMMONS
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley prairies when there was a very serious situation in 1961.
I agree with the hon. Member for Timiska-ming that loans are not the solution. We also need to have some kind of program of freight assistance, if there is any fodder available to be brought in, and also feed grain assistance.
I know there is plenty of feed grain and there could very well be an accelerated or expanded freight assistance program on feed grain. In addition, I think some arrangement could be worked out between the local municipal governments and the provincial governments to defer land taxes, with the Federal Government giving assistance by way of grants to the municipal governments so they can carry on. These are necessary things and represent the kind of program that will be of some positive help to the people of the area.
In addition, Mr. Speaker, in Alberta the Provincial Government assumed a larger share of the cost for emergency relief required to take care of operating costs, the purchase of fuel, seed and feed and so on for those people who had depleted their cash reserves and to some extent had even depleted their credit. These are the kinds of action the Federal Government should have taken particularly in view of the fact they have known about the situation for weeks and months.


John James Greene: Will the hon. Member permit a question?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Yes.


John James Greene: May I say I concur with the hon. Member most wholeheartedly, but does he suggest that the Federal Government under our constitution can embark on this type of program, affecting essentially provincial matters, without the province first suggesting that this kind of program be invoked?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Constitutionally the hon. Member is correct and the practice in the past has been for the provincial governments to initiate such programs. But I think it would be proper for Federal Government officials or the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) and the Minister of Forestry (Mr. Sauve) to provoke, shall I say, the provincial governments into taking this kind of action and also to indicate to both Provincial Governments that they can expect full and wholehearted support on the part of the Federal Government in sharing the cost. I think this could be done.


Mr. Macquarrie:: Will the hon. Member permit a question?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Yes.

DEBATES	June 23. 1965


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: In view of the fact that section 95 of the British North America Act declares agriculture to be a subject of concurrent jurisdiction with, in the case of conflict, the Dominion authority prevailing, and considering that administrative competence stems from legislative responsibility, would he not agree that the Federal authority has every right and propriety to move forward and take the initiative?
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: I know that the Federal Government has equal authority constitutionally with the Provincial Governments with respect to matters dealing with agriculture, but when we start to talk about emergency relief matters more things are involved which cannot be strictly confined to agriculture. In any event, there is nothing wrong with the programs that have been used in the past. If the hon. Member for Renfrew South (Mr. Greene) is sure as a result of his representations and his investigation of this matter during the past few months that he is justified in saying the province has not acted as expeditiously as it ought to have, then I should like to ask him this: Have there been any overtures from the Federal Department of Agriculture to see if they could not work out a program to which provincial and federal governments would agree during the past few months? Was the first indication there was going to be positive action taken by the Provincial Government given within the last two or three days? I think, Mr. Speaker, that these things should be worked out or at least discussed ahead of time. This situation has been continuing now for some time and has reached an emergency point where we need a crash program. This thing did not happen yesterday or even last month; it has been building up for a long time.
In addition to the other suggestions other hon. Members have made and one or two new ones I advanced, I should like to say I would support the suggestion made by the hon. Member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters) that cattle be moved for grazing purposes if there is grazing within a reasonable distance of the Ottawa Valley. Surely if there is such grazing it should be made available and there should be assistance given toward the cost of transportation. There is some very valuable foundation stock and breeding stock in this valley that needs to be saved. There is no other way of doing it. Either you take them out where there is grazing for them or you haul the fodder in. I suggest, at least for the balance of the summer months, the most
June 23, 1965

economical way this can be done, both in the interests of the farmer and the public treasury, is to move these cattle to where there is grass. This was done in Alberta in 1961 on a rather small scale. Some of the very valuable animals were moved and it was certainly worth while.
There is no question about the Members of this party supporting any action the federal Government wants to take to provide assistance under an emergency relief measure. We would like to know what the Government is going to do. We would like them to come before this Parliament and ask for some specific amount of money with some specific program to use it. They will certainly get the wholehearted support and cooperation of the Members of this party.
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)


Mr. Gerard Laprise (Chapleau):: Mr. Speaker, I cannot let this opportunity go by without saying at least a few words. Like other members, especially the hon. member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters), I am not annoyed but disgusted with the lack of interest shown by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) for the farm problems of eastern Canada. As a matter of fact, he should have been in the house today, to listen to our suggestions and tell us about the decisions the government intends to take concerning this matter.
I see that the Minister of Forestry is back and will probably speak in the name of the Minister of Agriculture.
In my opinion, that is the least the government can offer to us and, at this stage I want to point out to the house that for two years now eastern Canadian farmers, particularly those of Quebec, have been asking for the appointment of a Minister of Agriculture for the east. But when you consider the low value of the present federal Minister of Agriculture and when you see that the Liberal government is not even able to find a good minister for the west, I think it is therefore useless to have another one for eastern Canada.
The Minister of Agriculture being absent from the house, I hope that the Minister of Forestry will take into consideration the recommendations that will be made this afternoon and that he will deal with them.
It was mentioned earlier that, two or three days ago, the Ontario government reached an agreement with some American firms to set up rain making machines, in order to

Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley increase precipitation and check the drought now prevailing in this area.
Mr. Speaker, I must say immediately that I do not agree with that decision under the circumstances. In fact, last year, the Abitibi farmers sustained losses on account of those rain-making machines and it seems that when the mechanism of those machines is released, it is quite difficult to stop it. In fact, last autumn, throughout winter and even this spring, we had to fight against those infernal machines which did more harm than good. I know nothing of the experience and ability of the management of this American company but even if their machines can increase precipitation, they could be useful in a certain sector of the economy but harmful in others.
In my opinion, it would be much better to rely on Divine Providence and on nature as created to control the weather and the climate in our area.
It is undeniable, however, that some areas of the lower Ottawa valley are affected by drought, that they have suffered and are still suffering damages. I feel that the government should submit proposals this very day so as to solve this problem, not by offering loans to the farmers affected, but by providing them with grants in proportion to their present losses, because whether it be in the riding of Renfrew, in the Ottawa valley, in Quebec or elsewhere, farming is so uneconomic that the present difficulties resulting from weather conditions will surely cause great losses to the farmers.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to insist on one point. I said a few moments ago that the government should make proposals and take the initiative, if necessary, by inviting the ministers of Ontario and Quebec to meet with its representatives, not to study but to decide what help to give at this time.
Here I would like to recall the problem which arose last fall in the Abitibi, Temisca-mingue and Lake Saint John regions which were greatly affected not by drought but by over 67 days of rain in the Lake Saint John area and 69 in Abitibi, with distressing losses. In fact, losses exceeded $2 million in Abitibi only and I have here a newspaper article published in La Terre de Chez Nous, on February 24, 1965 which gives the results of a survey made in that connection. I shall read it for the information of the house and so that the Minister of Forestry may acquaint himself with it, in case he should not have already done so.
June 23, 1965
2828	COMMONS DEBATES
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley
Here is what we read in La Terre de Chez Nous with regard to the inquiry conducted by the U.C.C.:
In order to inform the people as to the damages to farming due to excessive rainfall during the crop year 1964, the Amos federation of the U.C.C. has held a Gallup Poll with 1200 farmers scattered in all the Abitibi parishes. All types of farms have been reached.
The Gallup Poll concerned the main sectors of production, hay, oats, potatoes and dairy products. Even if it does not have a scientific value, it still reveals a situation which leads us to the conclusion that farming has incurred heavy losses in that area and that farmers are deeply affected economically.
The survey reveals total losses of $2 million for the area, or an average of $850 per farm. The hay crop was affected in a proportion of 35 per cent, oats, 40 per cent, and potatoes, 60 per cent. The dairy production decreased by 25 per cent and the purchase of feed cost $50,000 more than during a normal season. To that must be added $100,000 for the purchase of feed and hay for the winter feeding of livestock. It is obvious that farmers do not have the means to take on such losses when we know already they can hardly make both ends meet.
Well, Mr. Speaker, that is what happened last fall in the Abitibi area. A similar and perhaps more serious situation arose in the Lake St. John area.
But on several occasions since last fall members of the areas concerned and myself have requested assistance from the federal government, we have been told that the province should take the initiative.
The Minister of Agriculture of the province of Quebec was kind enough to send me last week some copies of the letters he exchanged with the federal Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays). But that correspondence is not complete, much to my regret. That is the reason why I placed a notice of motion for the production of papers today on the order paper of the house so as to complete this information.
I notice that the Minister of Agriculture of the province of Quebec made certain general requests in order to assist some farmers of that province. However, it is to be regretted that those requests contained nothing specific as to the damages resulting from the heavy rain last fall in the Abitibi and Lake St. John area. But the Minister of Agriculture none the less made general requests in connection with the damages due to hail and tornadoes. What was the answer of the federal Minister of Agriculture? He replied that he had indeed received these recommendations, and I quote an excerpt from his answer to Mr. Courcy:
You undoubtedly know my opinion on such problems. I believe that the best way to avoid such disasters is crop insurance.

That, Mr. Speaker, was the reply of the federal Minister of Agriculture to his Quebec counterpart. It meant: "Well, participate in the joint crop insurance program, and we will be able to help you out."
Several years ago other provinces, particularly in western Canada, suffered similar disasters. It does not seem that the federal government was so niggardly in helping them out. But as far as assistance to farmers is concerned, it is much more restricted. I do not know whether this is because the government or the Minister of Agriculture of the province of Quebec are not categorical or energetic enough in their claims, or whether they ask for this assistance rather as a favour, but in any event, that request has been submitted, suggestions have been made and the federal Minister of Agriculture has flatly refused to help the province of Quebec.
Mr. Speaker, I will not speak any longer on this matter, but I do want to urge the government not to consider the situation- everybody is aware of it and I think it has been outlined clearly enough in this house today-but to decide immediately how it will assist the farmers of the Ottawa valley and those who find it difficult to survive in the Abitibi-Temiscamingue area thus avoiding many farm bankruptcies. We must endeavour to enable all those farmers to continue producing what is necessary for everyone's survival, that of the Minister of Agriculture as well as everyone else's, for if the farmers stop producing for one reason or another, we shall all die from starvation.
Mr. Speaker, we do not want to see farmers in difficult situations due to similar catastro-phies, whether these stem from natural causes or not. But, at any rate, we must assist them in order to spare them serious difficulties, and to ensure first of all, that they can continue to grow, to expand and to improve their lot, and through a healthy agricultural economy ensure the welfare of the country as a whole.


Clément Vincent: Mr. Speaker, I wish first of all to thank the hon.-


Mr. Vincent Drouin (Argenleuil-Deux-Mon-tagnes):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask the hon. member for Nicolet-Yamaska (Mr. Vincent) to relieve me from introducing a motion giving the floor to the Minister of Forestry (Mr. Sauve). All those who have spoken up to now have asked what the government has to offer. As the minister appointed to reply in the name
June 23, 1985
of the government is rising, I believe it is urgent and important that he may speak, all the more so since it is already 4.40 and the debate should end at five o'clock. I therefore request the hon. member for Nicolet-Yamaska to kindly yield the floor to the Minister of Forestry. Otherwise, I shall move a motion to that effect.


Clément Vincent: Mr. Speaker, I must say first of all that I intended to speak for a few minutes only and so allow the minister to tell us what the government intends to do.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, if this subject is to be aired properly, perhaps we should ask unanimous consent of the House to proceed with the debate until six o'clock rather than have it end at five o'clock.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Vincent Drouin: This is a very good suggestion.


Clément Vincent: In fact, this is what I intended to do. I wanted to ask the house or Your Honour whether it would be possible, at five o'clock, to request the unanimous consent of the house to continue this debate until six o'clock, in view of its great importance for all areas in Canada.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Order. I think the proper time to put that motion would be at five o'clock.


Mr. Douglas:: Mr. Speaker, would it not be possible to agree now to an order of the House extending the time until six o'clock, so as not to interrupt the debate, so that the Minister would not be interrupted in his speech, and so that the rest of us would be able to examine any proposals he may make?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: The
Chair would be very pleased to ask for unanimous consent at this time if it is the wish of the House.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):: Is it
agreed that we continue this debate until Royal Assent at 5.45 p.m.?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)


Clément Vincent: Mr. Speaker, first of all I must thank the
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley Deputy Speaker as well as hon. members of this house for allowing today a debate on a subject of extreme urgency and even of national importance.
The hon. member for Lanark (Mr. Doucett), the mover of the motion I had the honour to support, has stated his views remarkably well and has described accurately the distressing situation in which the farmers of eastern Ontario and western Quebec find themselves at this time due to severe drought conditions which began nearly four years ago and which have grown worse in the last two years.
A while ago the hon. member for Renfrew South (Mr. Greene) said that he had approached the government three weeks ago to discuss the problem.
It is surprising to note, that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) has been abroad for the past few days and that he is not here this afternoon. Equally disturbing is the fact that only yesterday, when asked in this house by the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue (Mr. Martineau)-who intended to participate in the discussion this afternoon but who could not be here on account of uncontrollable circumstances-if he could say whether there had been any consultations with the representatives of the province of Quebec on this matter of national urgency, the Minister of Forestry replied:
Not recently, as far as I know.
Then the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscaminque (Mr. Martineau) raised the question again, asking whether the federal government intended to take action on its own initiative with the provincial governments. And the Minister of Forestry answered:
The government cannot do that. The request must come from the provincial authorities.
That is why we discussed this question yesterday afternoon and decided to ask for the adjournment of the business of the house today to debate the problems facing farmers of eastern Ontario and western Quebec.
We have raised this question because we all recognize its urgency and importance, not only for the farmers who may be forced to give up their farms fairly soon if the federal and provincial governments do not take adequate steps, but also for the whole country, because it will affect all consumers, all farmers, as well as all regions of the country, more particularly the provinces of Ontario and Quebec.

June 23, 1965
2830	COMMONS
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley
In my opinion, the federal Minister of Agriculture should immediately ask the Ministers of Agriculture of Quebec and Ontario to meet with farm organizations in order to discuss this tragic situation. Indeed, that should have been done several weeks ago.
In my opinion, when a provincial problem takes on a national character, the federal government or the federal minister concerned may ask his provincial counterparts to meet with farm organizations to discuss the situation and take the necessary measures. And that should be done immediately to find solutions and to stop farmers of eastern Ontario and western Quebec from panicking, as seems to be the case now.
It is imperative that, following this meeting which should be held this week, the federal government be in a position to announce immediately an assistance program and thereby, as I said a moment ago, dispel the panic which has apparently spread among farmers.
We have suggestions to make concerning this program of assistance. Some have proposed a moratorium on loans already granted. As for me, I do not believe the solution lies in lending the farmers money to pull them out of a hole or telling them that we are prepared to wait a year or two so they can repay their loans. If, for instance, a farmer has agreed to pay back the Farm Credit Corporation at the rate of $800 a year, and if such a payment is delayed, if the farmer is asked to make it next year or the year after when he is in a position to resume a normal life, when that time comes, he will have to make a double payment to the Farm Credit Corporation.
What we need and what I am asking the government to do, is to consider the possibility of amending the federal farm credit act so that this extension of one or two years, which would be granted to the farmers concerned, be added not after the first year the farmer will have received an income, but at the end of the refunding period of the federal farm credit.
We know that the federal farm credit act allows farmers to borrow money for 29 years and that, in order to change the regulations of the corporation, an amendment to the farm credit act would be needed. The Farm Credit Corporation can say to the farmer: "We are going to grant you a new loan, we will start anew and you will pay all the inspection costs and legal fees. That is what can happen at present. On the other hand, if the govem-


ment moved an amendment to the farm credit act with respect to disasters, then the Farm Credit Corporation could postpone until after the 29 year period the payments owing to them and which will have to be paid.
The same thing should apply to the farm improvement loans act; payments should be postponed seven or eight years, that is when the farmer is in a position to reimburse.
The government could also help with the interest on money borrowed last year or the year before. We know, for example, that farmers of the Ottawa district and western Quebec have borrowed $3,000 and will not be in a position to reimburse those loans before six years. They pay 6 per cent interest so that after six years, it will cost them 36 per cent more than they received; 36 per cent of the money they received will be paid as interest. It is therefore absolutely impossible for a farmer to make those payments in a time of crisis.
In addition, it was suggested earlier that cattle should be brought to areas where there are pastures. This made sense in western Canada, but I do not think it would be an ideal solution in our area, because if milk cows are transferred to pastures 200, 300 or 400 miles away, farmers would not be willing to travel to those distant places morning and night in order to milk their cows. Therefore I feel it is impossible to provide this form of assistance in the present case.
What the government should do is to tell the farmers under a specific program: We are going to help you, do not worry about hay or fodder for the winter season. The farmers could then change their farms entirely into pasture lands. If some farmers of the area had sown 30, 40 or 50 acres with oats and if they were sure of getting federal or provincial assistance, they would all be in a position to change those acreages into pastures for their cattle, since they would obtain in the fall the required fodder to feed their cattle during the winter.
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)
Therefore, if our farmers in the area could turn whole farms or the acreage already seeded into grazing grounds, if the federal government and the provincial governments gave the guarantee needed for the winter months, we might be able to get to August, with some rain, because the grazing grounds would be better at such a time of the year.
The Minister of Agriculture will have to consider another factor when he meets the provincial ministers. There will certainly be a shortage of hay throughout Ontario and
June 23, 1965	COMMONS
Quebec next winter. That shortage will be acute enough to give rise to prohibitive prices and I cannot see a farmer buying a small bale of hay for 75c, 80c or even $1.
If the government asked at once the farmers of the Ontario and Quebec areas to cut as fodder everything which can be cut instead of letting oats get ripe, letting it come to term for feed grain, we could then avoid a shortage of hay in the provinces concerned. If later, this winter, the government accepted the Opposition's proposal to set up a feed grain agency for eastern Canada, we could compensate the loss of that grain by purchasing western feed grain which would replace the grain farmers have not been able to produce since they cut their oats and fodder acreage. This means that, in a few weeks, the government could assist the farmers from eastern Ontario and western Quebec who would like to feed their cattle on their farm, by subsidizing transportation and purchases. We know that feed grain can easily be harvested in the first week of August or towards the 15th of August and that it is excellent food for dairy and beef cattle, in short, for the whole livestock of those farmers.
We are making suggestions to the government; we are convinced that the situation has become too serious to ignore suggestions which could assist not only Ontario farmers but Quebec farmers as well.
Here are our suggestions: first, a meeting with provincial ministers concerned and farm organizations in order to establish an assistance program. Second, announce this assistance program as soon as possible to check the growing panic among the farmers concerned and the consumers and to show the farmers that they will get assistance from the federal and provincial governments.
Third, examine the question of federal farm credits or loans which farmers have obtained through banks and consider the possibility of extending after the period of 29 years repayment of loans granted by the Farm Credit Corporation and of extending by five, six or seven years the repayment period concerning loans granted under the farm improvements act.
Fourth, ask farmers in affected areas to use extensively their farm and even every bit of land on their farm as emergency grazing ground.
Fifth, ask Quebec and Ontario farmers to cut all the fodder they can in order to avoid a shortage next winter and use this fodder to help the farmers concerned; and say to Quebec and Ontario farmers: "We will have 22620-180
DEBATES	2831
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley the necessary feed grain for your livestock next winter, because you will have cut the harvest on your fields seeded for pasture. We will not give the feed to you, but we will sell it at a reasonable price."
Those are a few suggestions which I think should be considered by the governments concerned; I have discussed them with several farmers of the area and they found them sound. They may not settle all problems but they will certainly help the farmers concerned.
Mr. Speaker, I may have taken a little more time than I thought I would, but since the house has agreed to discuss this matter until six o'clock, we will thus have the opportunity of hearing the Minister of Forestry tell us what the government intends to do. As regards this emergency, I should like to say that such a drought could have severe effects in the future. For instance, if the farmers sell their dairy cattle, the market will be congested. Those animals are unfinished, they are not good and are not ready to be sold. The price will be lower than the average and a shortage will thus be created in connection with the quality dairy cattle owned by many Ontario farmers. Next year, they will have to buy a complete stock and, on account of that, prices will be higher. That will not be in the interest of the farmers concerned nor in the interest of the other dairy producers in Canada.
Mr. Speaker, I shall conclude my remarks by asking the government once more to do everything possible, not in 15 days, nor in three weeks, but right now, to settle this situation for the benefit of agriculture in Canada and more particularly in the Ottawa region.


Hon. Maurice Sauve (Minister of Forestry):: Mr. Speaker, it is as Acting Minister of Agriculture that I am taking part to this debate.
I believe it is most obvious that the problem referred to at the beginning of this sitting is extremely serious, since the motion for adjournment of the business of the house was supported by all parties, including government members.
Mr. Speaker, we are aware that this is a serious and urgent problem, and before leaving, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) informed me of his concern on this matter. For my part, following the questions that were put to me yesterday afternoon in the house, I got in touch immediately this morning with the authorities of the Department of Agriculture to investigate the situation, and
June 23, 1965

Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley I shall transmit later on to the house the information obtained.
Mr. Speaker, at this stage I would like to make a comment which seems to me of major importance. On two or three occasions this afternoon, reference was made to the absence of the Minister of Agriculture, when it is well known that he is away on an official mission to France and England where he has been attending a meeting of the OECD in Paris, and where he has met British cheese importers for the greatest benefit of agriculture, I am sure.
I believe, Mr. Speaker, that more indulgence should be shown regarding the absence from the house of the Minister of Agriculture or other ministers who are away on official business for the good of their own departments or of the country as a whole. In fact, I was highly annoyed this afternoon by the remarks of a certain member who noted my absence from the house for about five minutes while I had gone to secure certain documents for this afternoon's debate. I feel the hon. member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters) could, in due course, admit that once the debate had started I remained in the house and left only to fetch some documents.
The debates, which are often animated, should at least be courteous. In fact, we are not here to indulge in party politics but to defend the interests, among others, this afternoon, of the farmers of eastern Ontario and western Quebec, who are unfortunately the victims of a rather severe drought.
Several members made interesting suggestions this afternoon. Some spoke of a moratorium of some kind or another on federal government loans. I feel it should be possible to announce that we could grant some form of moratorium in the case of farmers who could prove that they are unable to meet their obligations due to the drought or similar conditions.


Clément Vincent: Will the Minister of Forestry allow me to ask him a question?
Under the present Farm Credit Act, do farmers not get an extension of six months or one year when such a disaster strikes?
Could the minister consider the possibility, as I have suggested, of adding this extension to 29 years?


Maurice Sauvé: With pleasure, Mr. Speaker.
A proposal was then made for a feed program. There was talk of a special aid program for feed grain; suggestions were made to the effect that the federal government should help needy municipalities; there were

proposals of help in transporting livestock, of acreage payments. Many other suggestions were made. I shall gladly refer these suggestions to my colleague the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) who, according to his original schedule, is due to arrive in Ottawa this afternoon.
I should like to comment on acreage payments. It has been said that, in 1962, there were acreage payments following the drought in the prairie provinces. Unless I am mistaken, acreage payments were first initiated in 1958, were made in 1960 and, if my information is correct, the last time they were made was in 1962. It is not clear whether they had been made in 1962 because of the drought or whether it was the continuation of a program initiated in 1958. In any event, Mr. Speaker, I do not want to discuss this problem in particular.
However, everyone is well aware that the initiative in this field of assistance in case of disaster rests with the provincial governments. This was the position taken by the previous government which stated that the responsibility to make a request rests with the provincial governments. I could quote from speeches made by certain members of the previous government in this respect. I shall not do so for it does not seem extremely important to me in the course of this debate. I shall be making a remark shortly which I think will satisfy the members of the house.
The Minister of Agriculture has often spoken here of the importance of crop insurance. Last year, the house passed an act for the reinsurance of provincial crop insurance. It is a pity all the provinces have not yet decided to establish their own crop insurance.
The federal government might consider it necessary to pass legislation on agricultural disaster such as drought and similar disasters. We may some day propose this type of legislation.
Yesterday, the Ontario government announced-
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a question? Is the Minister suggesting that the farmers of Ontario can insure grass? I understand it is only seeded acreage that can be insured. We are talking about forage, and that is almost impossible to insure.


Maurice Sauvé: Mr. Speaker, I could not hear the translation, but what I was referring to,
June 23, 1965	COMMONS
was disaster areas. I think the translator also said something about strawberries. I do not remember talking about "les fraises". I will continue to speak in French because then I am sure of the exact meaning of my words.
I have an important statement to make in a few minutes and I want to be sure it is understood. I will make the statement very slowly in French so hon. Members will not get the wrong interpretation of my words. I have had that difficulty very often lately, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday, the Ontario government announced that they had hired rain making companies for the drought-stricken areas. In a telephone conversation, assistance was requested from the federal government. Such request from the provincial government is now under consideration. The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) has an appointment with the representatives of British Columbia who will come here next week to discuss with him the problems of the early frost which affected certain fruit crops in British Columbia.
As far as I am concerned-and this is the important point that I should like to deal with this afternoon-I am prepared to suggest to the Minister of Agriculture, and I think he will accept, to call together representatives of the provinces of Ontario and Quebec to consider what assistance those two provinces, namely Ontario and Quebec, could give farmers of those drought stricken areas and what financial facilities the federal government could make available to the provinces for immediate and substantial help.
I realize, Mr. Speaker, that there is some delay in the interpretation.

I think this is probably the thing that is most urgently needed. I hope that when my colleague, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays), returns from Europe today he will be able to take the necessary steps to call together the representatives of Ontario and Quebec to discuss this situation immediately. It is evident that steps must be taken immediately if we wish to help these farmers who are seriously affected by the drought in eastern Ontario and western Quebec.

I think, Mr. Speaker, that the debate did draw to the attention of the house and, I hope of the Canadian public, not only the serious problem that is being faced-
DEBATES	2833
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley [English]


Mr. Cowan:: Mr. Speaker, will the hon. Member permit a question? I should like to ask the Minister of Forestry whether or not it is a fact that in spite of the deluge of statements of an urgent nature in respect of this matter this afternoon by hon. Members on the other side of this House, the Conservative-controlled legislature of Ontario prorogued last night; and does that not give some kind of an indication as to the urgency of this matter?
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Was the Minister of Agriculture for Ontario in Paris, or was he in Renfrew in the drought area?


Maurice Sauvé: I have noticed in the papers that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario prorogued last night, but I would not want to bring any partisanship into this debate. I think this question is extremely serious.


Warner Herbert Jorgenson: May I ask the Minister a question? He is a member of the Cabinet and would know about these things. Does he think it is necessary for the Parliament of Canada to wait for the legislature of the province to take action on this matter?


Maurice Sauvé: I was just completing my remark that I did not feel there was any necessity to bring partisanship into the debate because the situation is serious.

I believe this afternoon's debate will have drawn the attention of the house and of the Canadian people, not only to the serious problem due to drought conditions in certain areas of Ontario and Quebec, but also to the urgency for all provincial governments and the federal government to give greater consideration to the problems of eastern farming.
Eastern agriculture is important, not only for the Canadian economy, but also for a great part of our population which depends on it for its income.
I do not want to resume my seat after this short intervention without thanking the members of the house who, this afternoon, brought forward serious suggestions toward the solution of this problem.
I can give the assurance that my colleague, the Minister of Agriculture, and the government of Canada will take immediately the necessary steps to convene representatives of the provinces of Ontario and Quebec in order that we may examine together what means
June 23, 1965
2834	COMMONS
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley could be taken at once to assist the farmers in need as the result of this drought.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in this debate may I say I have listened from the beginning and I must say that the Minister of Forestry (Mr. Sauve) in speaking in the debate made it known first of all that he was a replacement and, second, he dealt at great length and in an apologetic manner with the Government's failure to take action, and the absence of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays). However, he did suggest that in the light of this debate he was certain he could convince the Minister of Agriculture when he returns to Ottawa to have a meeting with the provincial Ministers of Agriculture concerned to discuss how help can be given by all levels of Government to this drought stricken area. I think we in the Opposition are thankful to the Minister of Forestry for taking it upon himself to try to convince the Minister of Agriculture to look at this matter very carefully and in a serious way.
In my view the farmers of the Ottawa Valley should be very thankful to the conscientious Member for Lanark (Mr. Doucett) who rose this afternoon and convinced you, Mr. Speaker, that this debate was urgent and that the matter should be discussed. Through this debate we have now accomplished something. When the Minister of Agriculture comes back to Ottawa he is going to meet with the provincial Ministers. This is a forward step. We can only hope that he will see fit to grant some assistance.
I should like to make a few remarks about the drought stricken area and the proposed rain making operation. There is no question that the whole Ottawa Valley is devastated by drought. There is no question that the federal Government has failed to provide proper leadership and initiative. In today's Ottawa Journal we see that the provincial Government of Ontario is prepared to spend $200,000 to hire rain makers. The province is still waiting for approval of the project by the federal Government, which it hopes will pay part of the cost. In other words, the provincial Government has gone ahead and gambled on a 20 to 1 shot so far as producing rain is concerned, and has gambled on another 20 to 1 shot that the Federal Government may be interested enough to pay half the cost. By this debate I think we have now convinced the Minister of Forestry at least and perhaps some of his colleagues that the Government


should show a little interest and concern in this regard and pick up half the cost.


Mr. Francis:: Would the hon. Member permit a question?


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Yes.


Cyril Lloyd Francis: I was listening with interest to the hon. Member's remarks concerning a federal grant, but has the hon. Member any idea of the number of ARDA projects submitted by the Province of Ontario dealing with these counties affected by the drought?


William Arnold Peters: Are you suggesting they will solve the problem?


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I am not concerned here about long range projects. We are now in the midst of a drought in the Ottawa valley which will have repercussions all across Canada. I am a firm and ardent supporter of ARDA but it is a long range program. What we are looking for today is immediate assistance to the farmers concerned. As I was saying, the severe drought in eastern Ontario and western Quebec and, in fact, in all of Ontario will have repercussions all across Canada. In yesterday's and today's papers we can read what is happening to the cattle market in eastern Canada. We read reports of farmers keeping their cattle on their trucks as late as two o'clock in the morning at the auction markets at Cobden and Perth in the hope of being able to get them into the hands of somebody who can feed them because these farmers are completely out of grass and feed. If you have ever been a farmer or know anything about farming you will realize the plight of these farmers when they have to keep their cattle on their trucks until two o'clock in the morning, waiting for somebody to buy them who can take them off their hands and feed them. You realize the plight facing these farmers.
What prices did they receive for their cattle? They got as low as 14 cents per pound, while beef on the Toronto market is selling for about 25 cents a pound. This shows the drastically depressed prices at which these farmers are having to sell their cattle in order that the cattle can be fed and looked after. Rather than the Minister of Agriculture being in Paris trying to buy more cattle or improve the strains of Canadian cattle, which is a worthy endeavour, he should be here trying to look after the cattle we already have. He should be here trying to create markets and trying to sustain these farmers who are prepared to sacrifice their basic
June 23. 1985	COMMONS
herds and their entire livelihood because of drought conditions which have lasted now for three or four years, as has been pointed out this afternoon.
It is all well and good for the Minister to be absent and I certainly do not condemn him for travelling, but he has an uncanny knack of being away at the very time when he is needed here. He is away doing something which may have long range benefits for agriculture, but for some weeks now there has been plenty of evidence of drought conditions about which the farmers were concerned and plenty of evidence that action should be taken and leadership shown.
Leadership is what the farmers want. When they are faced with drought conditions beyond their control they want to be able to look to somebody for help and leadership. The federal Minister of Agriculture should be providing that leadership to these farmers caught in the drastic conditions facing them today rather than spending a nice time, shall we say, in Paris-


Maurice Sauvé: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to object to the remarks of the hon. Member. I explained what the Minister was doing in Paris, what he did in London for the cheese producers and so on. I would hope the hon. Member would refrain from making remarks implying that the Minister is not doing his duty. Right through the course of my remarks I tried to keep the debate on a very high level, with no partisanship, and I would not like my hon. friend to behave differently.
[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)
It seems essential. The situation is serious and we are not trying to benefit politically from a very serious situation in which some Eastern Canadian farmers find themselves.
I would not like my colleague to go on saying things about the Minister of Agriculture which I feel are absolutely unfair in the present circumstances.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: This is not a point of order. I do not really know why I relinquished the floor. If I feel the Minister could serve the country better by staying at home at this time, I am within my rights in standing up and saying so. I may say the Minister of Forestry could have spent his time better here in Canada than on the Isle of Capri some time in the past. This has nothing to do with the drought conditions that are now concentrated in this area.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order; I would remind the hon. Member that there was a
DEBATES	2835
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley motion submitted to the hon. Member for Lanark (Mr. Doucett) which deals with drought in eastern Canada and the House should deal with that subject.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I intend to deal with that subject. I will refer to the question of rain making and say that the Provincial Government is prepared to risk $200,000 in a 20 to 1 longshot in the hope that the Federal Government will go along with them. We see pictures of the hon. Member for Renfrew South in a summer suit surveying the drought conditions in his Ottawa Valley. It is all well and good to go out in a white shirt, a summer suit and tie to look at dry soil, but it is another thing to see your crops shrivel. Then, and only then, can you really fully appreciate the drought conditions. I have seen acre after acre of crops wither on the stalk. You know then how the farmer feels in this regard. Pictures in the newspapers do not help. Pictures in the newspapers do not provide leadership. This is what the farmers are asking for.
Let us look at this rain making proposal. What does it say in the Globe and Mail? It says that rain makers are to be in Lanark County within the next 10 days and will be set up and ready to operate within the next 20 days. Let us just see where that puts us. We see crops shrivelling on the stalk today. We see that no rainmaking will be in progress for another 20 days. We have reports that the hay crop will be reduced, even now, by 25 per cent, so where will it be 20 days from now?
I have some grave doubts about whether or not this cloud seeding will be successful. It has been carried on for 12 years at least in Alberta and in my own constituency, so I have some grave doubts about it. However, even if it works it is still 20 days away and the crop has been reduced 25 per cent below normal now. How much will the crops be shrivelled by then? Will the hon. Member for Renfrew South get his picture in the newspaper then and say, "I am here; I am with you." Will the Minister of Agriculture be in the country 20 days from now? How will this fit-


John James Greene: On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please.


John James Greene: The hon. Member has criticized me for attending on the premises of this farmer with the Minister of Agriculture of the Province. I have never claimed to be
June 23, 1965
2836	COMMONS
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley a farmer. I have learned all I can about their problems and I am doing the best I can to help. The hon. Member is criticizing my attendance, but he has attended here less than any other Member. I know he attended 13 out of 23 meetings of the Agriculture Committee.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please.


John James Greene: If he is as interested as he claims, why was he not there?


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please; we are now obviously debating a side issue. I would ask hon. Members again to limit their remarks to the subject matter of the motion.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I have nothing to hide. My attendance in the Agriculture Committee is far better than that of any Member of the Liberal Party.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: The Committee may have been discussing tobacco, which cannot be grown in my constituency, and I might not have attended some of those meetings.
I want those Members who question my attendance to know that I am responsible to the constituents of Acadia, not the agriculture industry of Canada. I question the attendance of the Minister of Agriculture in this regard.
Let us take a look at some of the action that can be taken with regard to this severe drought condition. We all know, and the Minister of Forestry knows, that a great deal of feed grain is shipped from Western Canada to Eastern Canada. He knows, and a great many others on that side of the House know, that many cattle are shipped down to be fed in Eastern Canada. If we have a severe drought condition with no hay, no grain, no corn, what will happen? I say that this severe drought condition will have repercussions which will reach all across Canada and could easily have a drastic effect on the cattle market this fall. We want action. The farmers of the Ottawa Valley and the western side of Quebec want action. Farmers all across Canada want action. It is all well and good for the Minister of Forestry to say, we are going to have a meeting. I think it is the duty of the Minister of Agriculture to say, we want to meet with the Provincial Ministers here and I have in mind the outline of a plan which could be accepted or not accepted by the various Ministers of Agriculture in the Provinces. This is what he should do. It is his duty to provide this leadership. He is the


spokesman for the whole agriculture industry in Canada. I maintain this situation will have repercussions throughout the whole agriculture industry in Canada.
What should he do? It is quite easy to say. A number of projects have been suggested already and I intend perhaps to go over a few more. First of all, though, he should provide leadership and he should provide initiative. We are thankful that the Member for Lanark brought this subject up today so we could move the Minister of Agriculture into providing the initiative which I feel he has not provided up to this time for the agriculture industry. He could go along with the rain making idea. It is worth a gamble, they say, of 20 to 1, but I would say it is more like 50 to 1. He may well go along with that. I know, and the Minister of Agriculture knows, that a pasture can be short of grass, but there is a way of bringing feed grain to the grass. Western grain can be shipped in and corn can be shipped in from southern Ontario or the United States. Cattle can be fattened very economically through a system of grain on grass. This can be done and the Minister of Agriculture could provide the initiative and the leadership by announcing immediately to the farmers who are sacrificing their herds at Cobden and Perth markets: Do not sell your herds; do not sell your replacement cattle because help is on the way. This is what he should announce. He should ship in grain and the farmers should feed grain on grass. This is a well established practice in Western Canada, and cattle can be successfully fattened in this manner.
Then, again, freight assistance should be paid on the shipment of hay for dairy cattle. Cows that are producing milk cannot produce milk without good class silage or hay. Freight assistance should be paid on this, and freight assistance should be given to the shipping of machinery up into Timiskaming, or wherever the hay is available. Farmers should be encouraged to go out and put it up. They would be encouraged if they were told: Put your machinery on a flat car and the Government will pay the freight to wherever the hay is. This is a workable program. It has worked in the Prairie Provinces in the past and will work in this area of Eastern Canada.
In so far as beef cattle are concerned which are on grass, they could easily be shipped to community pastures and freight assistance could be offered by the federal Government for cattle shipped to grass rather than to market. Instead of farmers waiting
June 23, 1965

up until two o'clock in the morning to unload their trucks and rid themselves of the burden of feeding these cattle when their pastures are poor, the Minister should provide leadership by telling the farmers to put the stock in a freight car and ship them to a community pasture, even if it is on Manitou-lin Island-ship them anywhere there is grass in western Ontario or western Quebec. The Government should pay the freight charges. Let us save the farmers from selling their means of livelihood. It is the prime responsibility of the Minister of Agriculture to maintain and sustain farmers on the land, but sometimes I wonder if he feels that way. Sometimes I think he wants to move them off the land, and the quicker that is done the happier he will be.
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)
Suggestions have been made with regard to forestalling collections due under the Farm Credit Corporation Act and the Veterans Land Act. This can be done easily, and the Minister of Forestry thinks so, but it would only affect farmers who have loans under those acts.
Today the Globe and Mail has a full page devoted to the drought situation in Ontario, reporting that the banks are saying farmers are behind on their loans and that many places are being put up for sale because of this. These loans were not made under either of the acts I have mentioned, but there should be some means whereby the federal Government could move in and take over interest payments on these loans for six or 12 months until the drought situation is relieved.
The Minister of Forestry referred to the ARDA program and is now directing it as a war on poverty. Mr. Kent has been appointed as a $25,000 a year man, and so far as I know is not responsible to Parliament or any department. His main job is to eradicate poverty, and here is one step that could be taken in conjunction with his efforts, a step that would forestall closure on loans in the drought stricken area. Surely the Minister of Forestry can relay these suggestions to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hays) when he returns from his very busy trip selling cheese and buying cattle which, no doubt, will have a long-range beneficial effect on the agricultural industry in Canada.
I have been heartened to some degree by the Minister's indication that action will be taken. I hope further action will be taken after this debate ends. I close on this note by saying I hope the Minister of Agriculture
Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley will take a continuing interest in this question, that leadership and initiative will be shown by the Government in providing assistance to farmers in conditions which are far from normal.


Vincent Drouin: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say a few words about the urgent situation in which our farmers of eastern Ontario and western Quebec find themselves. That situation is really critical and an immediate solution is needed.
I myself am particularly aware of this, since I own about 200 acres of land under crop and probably 50 acres for grazing. For about a month or a month and a half, while we were short of water, I have been able to see the situation becoming more and more critical. This is nothing new for us, because it was the same thing last year. We did not have any water or hay and we had to get some from remote areas. Fortunately, the government paid part of the transportation costs in the case of the hay supply, which helped the farmers, but I feel there should be other means to deal with this situation and even prevent it.
I am surprised to hear most members, if not nearly all of them, say that it comes within the jurisdiction of provincial governments to initiate such solutions. They seem to forget completely section 95 of the British North America Act which provides that:
In each province the Legislature may make Laws in relation to Agriculture in the Province, and to Immigration into the Province; and it is hereby declared that the Parliament of Canada may from Time to Time make Laws in relation to Agriculture in all or any of the Provinces, and to Immigration into all or any of the Provinces; and any Law of the Legislature of a Province relative to Agriculture or to Immigration shall have effect in and for the Province as long and as far only as it is not repugnant to any Act of the Parliament of Canada.
This means that not only the federal government has a competing jurisdiction in farm matters, but that this jurisdiction is greater than that given to provincial legislatures. This jurisdiction is similar for immigration. Why always wait for the provinces to act, when the federal government has full and entire jurisdiction. Instead of infringing upon provincial jurisdiction in the matter of social security or any other field, why not assume the responsibilities conferred upon us by the British North America Act? Why not assume our responsibilities in the matter of farming? Why always shift our responsibilities to the prov-
June 23, 1965

Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley inces, when we not only have the constitutional means but also the material and financial ones to assume those responsibilities?
During the past few years, we have heard about rain making machines to control this element which can be destructive for our farmers: either too much or not enough rain. We see private companies try experiments with those machines, while the government is looking on; whereas, in my opinion, it should take the lead in experimenting with and controlling this element, so as to regulate not only the flow of excessive rain, but also certain variations in the weather in order to prevent, for instance, devastating frosts such as we have experienced in the past few years. The federal government is not only legally empowered but financially able to conduct those experiments so as to control and manage the companies in a position to make a useful contribution in this situation.
This is one of the suggestions I am making to the government, and allow me to refer once again to the matter of constitutionality. As reported on page 2200 of Hansard, in reply to a question of the hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue (Mr. Martineau), the Minister of Agriculture stated:
Mr. Speaker, these representations-
He was talking about the representations made by provinces or farming groups to inform the federal government about the drought which prevails in eastern Canada.
-should first be made to the Province. In this regard may I say that on Tuesday afternoon in Toronto I discussed the drought problem with the Ontario Minister of Agriculture. We are all greatly concerned about this matter, but at the moment we have had no representations from the Province.
I commend the Minister of Agriculture for his interest in the matter. But 1 say to him that he does not have to wait for representations from the Ontario government, because action can be taken. Some means have been suggested earlier and I would not want to go over that ground again, since time is running short.
However, I should like to mention a pledge made by this government to the people of eastern Canada during the last election campaign.
At that time, we have promised-and I am one of those who have promised it on behalf of the Liberal party-that a feed grain agency would be created. We have the support in this regard of the agriculture committee which has made a unanimous recommendation to the house.
[Mr. Drouin.J
What are we waiting for before introducing legislation along those lines? I think such a bill would be just as important as the one we have considered yesterday relating to the freedom of action of publications circulated in Canada. Surely, it is just as important to look after eastern farmers and to fill the promises we have made.
It has been suggested that farm loan payments should be postponed. This suggestion from the hon. member for Nicolet-Yamaska (Mr. Vincent), which would have the effect of completing existing provisions of the Farm Credit Act, seems to be an excellent one, I think.
Such a step would only be useful to the farmers if payments were postponed until the end of the repayment period. I wholeheartedly support the suggestion of the hon. member for Nicolet-Yamaska and I urge the Minister of Forestry (Mr. Sauve), whose sincerity is well known, to exercise the necessary pressure on the Minister of Agriculture. I can assure him that other hon. members will support any representation he makes to the Minister of Agriculture.
[DOT] (5:40 p.m.)


Cyril Lloyd Francis: I am glad to have the opportunity to take part in a debate on a subject which so seriously affects farmers in this area. The general situation is one which brings to mind the droughts on the prairies in the thirties. I must say I wish there were more Members from the West here today to show a sympathetic interest in the problems of some of the eastern provinces. I congratulate the hon. Member for Acadia (Mr. Horner) on the measures he was prepared to support.
Without question we are facing a serious emergency. A number of suggestions have been made from all quarters of the House as to what might be done. Measures to deal with the situation, both short-term and long-term, will have to be brought forward. I know that the Minister himself has been much concerned about the situation. But at this point I should like to go on record as saying a few things concerning the lack of action on the part of the Ontario provincial Department of Agriculture. The ARDA program was put on the books while the party opposite was in power. I heard a great deal about what was going to be done for the Ottawa Valley. They were very proud of it. What, in fact, was done before this Government took office? There was not a single ARDA project approved for
June 23, 1965

any one of the counties affected by this drought. Schemes were submitted to Toronto and they died within the provincial Department of Agriculture. The Province of Ontario has taken a narrow and restricted view of ARDA projects. They have related them to watersheds; without a watershed there can be no project. In the counties affected by this drought there are no community pastures. There are no deep wells, no public assistance arrangements for farmers.
In the thirties the drought in the West was followed by measures of great importance in reaching a long term solution of farmers' difficulties-for example, the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act and the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. Under the constitutional arrangements which govern this country, the ARDA program was set up in such a way that grants were to be made by the federal Government. We have put a lot of new life into this program. I am proud of the enthusiasm the Minister has shown and the report he has submitted to this House. His addresses on the subject of rural poverty constitute a memorable series of speeches which I believe should be studied by scientists and sociologists across Canada.
The projects which have to go forward under ARDA arise at local municipal level and go to the provincial level. And it is there we find the dead hand; it is there we find the hand that kills, the hand that shows no initiative and no interest in a long term solution to the problems facing Eastern Ontario agriculture. The province is showing an interest in supporting a rain making project. The hon. Member for Acadia had something to say about projects of this kind. I do not know whether it works or not. Like my hon. friend from Renfrew South (Mr. Greene) I do not claim to be a farmer; but I am very much concerned about the farming communities I have the honour to represent in this House. I do know that unless some imagination is shown by the provincial authorities in the Province of Ontario, unless some interest is taken, unless they quit dragging their heels, we shall continue to suffer, in the absence of long term remedial measures. Those counties will suffer in the future as they are suffering now. The federal authorities are alert. They are concerned. Officials at federal level have made a number of technical suggestions and these are being reviewed at the present time. But we are not in a position where we can simply move on our own in disregard of the constitutional 22620-181

Drought Conditions in Ottawa Valley practice of this country. We have to act together, and this can only be done if the provincial authorities take a different view of the projects under ARDA upon which they have to pass.


Mr. R. R. Southam (Moose Mountain):: First
of all, I must compliment you, Mr. Speaker, on your good judgment in accepting this motion for debate this afternoon. In the second place I should like to compliment my hon. friend from Lanark (Mr. Doucett) for introducing this motion on a matter of such urgency and importance.
When the Minister rose to speak he said all parties supported the motion. But listening to the debate today it was my impression that the party opposite, represented by the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Mc-Ilraith), were opposed to it, together with the Social Credit Party, whose views were expressed by the hon. Member for Medicine Hat (Mr. Olson).
I am somewhat surprised by the comments which were made by the hon. Member for Carleton (Mr. Francis). In effect he tried to drag a red herring through this debate by his reference to the ARDA program. As he said, we in this party are proud of ARDA and we hope to see the present Government develop this program further. However, it is not an emergency program intended to deal with an emergency situation. It is a long term program whose effects will be felt in the next 20 years.
[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)
I come from the Province of Saskatchewan and I can well remember the emergency situation of 1961, and what was done at that time. The hon. Member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Hamilton) was Minister of Agriculture, and immediately the gravity of the drought situation became apparent an emergency meeting was called composed of Ministers of Agriculture from the three western provinces, and members of the agriculture caucus. As a result of these meetings an emergency program was devised. We had to move rapidly because the danger signs had appeared; farmers were beginning to dispose of basic herds which had taken a lifetime to build up. Herds of this kind cannot be disposed of without great loss to those concerned. Perhaps I can summarize what was done under that emergency program. First we re-established the emergency freight rate assistance program for moving haying equipment to hayfields, and for shipping the forage back to the farmers. It was also mentioned by my colleague the

June 23, 1965
Royal Assent
hon. Member for Acadia that we should move cattle to the hayfields. Second, we accomplished the establishment of forage banks by rural municipalities with a $5 per ton subsidy beir/ provided equally between the provincial and federal governments. This measure also intruded a price ceiling of $20 per ton so that exploitation in prices would not take effect when this emergency was on. We found that sometimes when you have a situation where a commodity becomes scarce there is exploitation, and so we put a ceiling on it.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, inasmuch as we have just received the summons from the Senate, could I ask if the House would give consideration, after returning from that other business, to continuing to sit, in view of the fact that the Minister will be returning and that this important matter is not concluded? By unanimous consent would the House continue to sit and iiscuss this matter, so that the Minister wc/ild have the opportunity of replying?


Mr, Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. I suggest that the Minister will have the opportunity to reply at some other time. The hon. Member knows that according to the rules there is a motion to adjourn the House, and this discussion terminates at the end of the proceedings for the day.


William Arnold Peters: But by unanimous consent anything is possible, Mr. Speaker.


Some hon. Members:: No.



THE ROYAL ASSENT

[Stage Direction]
A message was delivered by Major C. R. Lamoureux, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, the Honourable the Deputy Governor General desires the immediate attendance of this honourable House in the chamber of the honourable the Senate.
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker with the House went up to the Senate chamber.
And being returned:
Mr. Deputy Speaker informed the House that the Deputy Governor General had been pleased to give, in Her Majesty's name, the Royal Assent to the following bills:
An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service for the financial year ending the 31st March, 1966.
An Act to amend the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation Act.
An Act to amend the Bank Act and the Quebec Savings Banks Act.
An Act to amend the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act.

Mr. MacNaughl:: Mr. Speaker, on Friday the House will be asked to consider the committee stage of Bill C-188, an Act to amend the Income Tax Act; second reading of an Act to amend the Children of War Dead (Education Assistance) Act; second reading of an Act to amend the Army Benevolent Fund Act; the resolution preceding a bill to amend the Judges Act; the resumed debate on the resolution to set up a joint committee on consumer credit; a motion to consider interim supply, and two supplementary estimates which, I understand, have been discussed with the Leaders of the various parties. Of course this statement is made with the reservation that the order in which the items have been announced is not necessarily the order in which they may be considered.


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say in reference to this announcement concerning the resumption of the debate on the establishment of a committee on consumer credit that it was based upon other considerations which were not outlined in the announcement. I want it absolutely understood that that is the situation.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Pursuant to section 1 and section 4 of Standing Order 2, this House stands adjourned until eleven o'clock in the forenoon of Friday next.
At six o'clock the House adjourned, without question put, pursuant to Standing Order.

Friday, June 25. 1965