1965-02-17

Mr. Speaker:: I have a short correction to make. At page 1045 of Votes and Proceedings for yesterday there appears an entry relating to the tabling by the Minister of Finance, pursuant to standing order 40, of the public accounts, volumes I to III, and an abridged version thereof.
At the same time a copy of the annual report of the Auditor General of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1964 was also tabled but through an oversight it was not recorded in yesterday's Votes and Proceedings. A record will be made in today's issue of the tabling of this annual report.



OLD AGE SECURITY


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I have a short statement to make about old age security. The government, and I am sure all hon. members of the house, have read with great interest the proceedings of the joint committee on the Canada pension plan, and I would like if I may, Mr. Speaker, to take this opportunity of congratulating the joint chairmen and the representatives of all parties who were members of the committee. I think I speak for all members of the house when I express appreciation for their work, most of which was done during the recess.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Lester Bowles Pearson: In reviewing the representations made to the committee, its discussions and its report, the government has come to the conclusion that there should be certain amendments on the lines recommended by the committee, though not identical in all respects, and there is also one major change that should be made in Bill No. C-136 consequent upon the work of the committee. Many of the representations made to the committee were concerned not with the new earnings-related pension as such but with the flat rate pension which is now provided at age 70 for virtually all Canadians under the Old Age Security Act. Some of the proposals put forward are ones that everyone would like to act on, but they are too expensive for the government to accept as financially responsible at this time when there are so many other things that we in Canada need to do.
One of the most urgent of our social needs, however, is to make pensions available at age 65. Bill No. C-136 proposes to do this, over a five year transition period, both for the new earnings-related pension and the flat rate old age security pension. Under the bill as it is now before the house old age security would be paid in a reduced amount the earlier it is taken. Many of the people and organizations submitting briefs to the committee pointed to hardships that this reduction could involve. After reviewing such representations the government has come to the view that it should recommend to parliament that old age security be paid in the full amount from the time people are 65.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Lester Bowles Pearson: That amount at present is, of course, $75, to which it was raised in 1963. Under Bill No. C-136 the $75 will in future increase automatically if the cost of living rises. The additional change the government now recommends is that, beginning next January, the full pension will be paid to people who have reached age 69; the following year the full pension will be paid at age 68, and so on until by 1970 everyone reaching age 65 will be entitled to the full amount of $75 or more, in addition of course to the Canada pension plan benefits which will then be available to newly retiring people.
The government will move this amendment to Bill No. C-136 when the relevant sections in part IV are reached in committee. Since additional expenditures are involved, I hereby give notice of the necessary resolution, in the name of the Minister of National Health and Welfare, which might be taken to the table now, Mr. Speaker. I should make it plain that the old age security pension at age 65

Canada Pension Legislation will not be subject to any retirement or means test.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Old age security is a universal, flat rate benefit, and we do not believe that conditions should be applied in a federal program of this kind. At the same time, however, the government does think it reasonable to recognize that the needs of people between 65 and 70, when many are retired but some are not, vary a great deal. It is therefore the government's intention to recommend to parliament that the Income Tax Act be modified so that the additional personal deduction of $500, now available from age 65, will in future begin at age 70.
This change will, of course, be made only in stages as the old age security benefit becomes available to people at ages earlier than 70. The withdrawal of the additional deduction will not affect people who have little or no income apart from old age security. It will affect only those people between the ages of 65 and 70 who have other resources sufficient to put them into a taxable category.
What is now proposed, Mr. Speaker, will of course cost money. We believe, however, that this cost can and should be met. Through the conjunction of old age security and the Canada pension plan we will have a pension system that puts Canadian social justice in the forefront of achievement throughout the world.


Hon. J. W. Monleiih (Perth):: Mr. Speaker, we are now seeing what I think is the fifth edition of the Canada pension plan. May I say immediately that we as the official opposition heartily agree with this particular step. If I recall correctly, moves along this line were suggested in the committee but were opposed by the government majority in that committee.
I think there is one thing I should mention, and that is that I do not think it is entirely equitable to have the $75 becoming payable to people aged 69 one year from now, to those aged 68 two years from now, and so on. Another matter that the Prime Minister did not mention-at least if he did I failed to hear it-was whether the extra payment was to come out of Canada pension plan funds. I am not sure whether the Prime Minister did mention that, but at this stage I think that is all I can say. We will be discussing the plan further. The official opposition at that time will have many more suggestions to make which can improve this present plan;


and I believe the government should take these further suggestions into consideration when a major step like this is being announced.


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this party I want to express our very warm appreciation of the announcement made today by the Prime Minister. Even though I might wish that the announcement had gone further, what has been announced indicates the value of the work which was done by the joint committee on Bill No. C-136.
I want most of all to say that what is being proposed in this announcement does establish a very important principle, namely that the flat rate old age security pension should be available without a means test at ages below 70. I wish the full pension could start at 65 right away, but at any rate the principle has been established that we are to get down to 65 as the universal age for the paying of pensions under the Old Age Security Act.
With regard to the principle, I wish only to say that it is good and that it is warmly welcomed. In my view the government has done well to pay attention to some of the arguments which were put forward in the joint committee, particularly with respect to the earlier proposal of the government to pay old age security at ages between 65 and 70 at a reduced rate. The government has now come to the realization that that is not a good idea but that instead we are going to have the full amount of the old age security payable at these lower ages. I must say that I wish the progress could be a little swifter in getting down to the age of 65, but at least we are getting it started.
I hope that even yet the government will study the other phases of the work of the joint committee and will note that there was very strong support in the committee not only for lowering the eligible age for old age security but for increasing the amount of the pension under that act. While it is true that my amendment to raise the pension to $100 per month did not receive the support of the committee, there was support for raising it by some amount.
I remind the government that when it brought in the first version of the Canada pension plan in 1963 it recognized that coincident with the Canada pension plan there had to be an increase in the amount of old age security. That increase was brought in separately in 1963, but I submit that when the Canada pension plan benefits begin to be

received by Canadian citizens in 1967, it will not be good enough to leave the fiat rate old age security benefit at $75 per month. Just as the government has now made an announcement as to what is going to happen in 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969 and 1970, I think it should make an announcement as to its intentions for increasing the basic amount of old age security. It is still my view, and the view of this party which has backed me in the move I made in the committee, that the pension ought to be $100 per month payable at age 65.
Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, we welcome the announcement that has been made, and we are particularly glad that an important principle has been established, namely that the flat rate universal pension is to be paid to Canadians at age 65.
I have just one other comment to make. I noticed the suggestion of the Prime Minister that the $500 extra exemption on income tax, which is now available to persons age 65 and over, is to be removed progressively. I gained the impression that it is to be removed one year at a time. May I suggest to the government that there is still time to deal with this suggestion, and that if the government feels that with these pensions being paid at these ages it is not necessary to have the differentiation that existed, rather than take away the $500 extra exemption from those over 65 it would be better to increase the exemption for everyone to at least $1,500 under the Income Tax Act. I think that is the kind of change which ought to be considered by the Minister of Finance when he brings down his budget.
Mr. Speaker, hon. members are well aware of the improvements we should like to have made, and I hope I have set them out clearly in the few remarks I have made to the house. But even if there is some suggestion of criticism, and a clear suggestion that something more should be done, on behalf of this party and on behalf of the Canadian people I would state that we welcome the kind of announcement which has been made today.


Mr. Bert Leboe (Cariboo):: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this group I should like to say at once that we are very happy the government has seen fit to bend its ear and pay attention to the proceedings of the Canada pension plan committee, which did work hard to produce results. I was interested in the announcement by the government to the effect that the gap between ages 65 and 70 will be filled. I refer to that gap as the time between the
Canada Pension Legislation normal retirement age of 65 and the eligible age for old age security at 70. We are very happy that this gap is being closed, and we should like to commend the government in this regard.
Mr. Speaker, I am very much concerned about the indexing or tying of the pensions to the cost of living. I am not suggesting that an increase is not needed, but I do think a periodical review is a much superior system to indexing, because by indexing we are opening a door which is tantamount to the lid of Pandora's box. I think we will find ourselves being pressured into indexing for many other purposes with the result of a lessening of the bands on inflation. I think the government should take a very serious look at this situation. If we were to make a proper analysis at this time of the cost of an increase in the amount of old age security payments I think we would find that the overall cost to the Canadian people would not be nearly as great as it might appear on the surface, because if you give the people of Canada something as of right you remove the necessity to give them something because they happen to be unfortunate and in need.
I certainly hope the government may see fit to increase the old age security payment substantially over the amount now paid because, as I have said, I do not think it will cost the taxpayers too much.


Mr. Real Caoueiie (Villeneuve):: Mr. Speaker, I was very interested to hear the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) state in the house that he intends to become more and more creditist between now and 1970, when he announced that in 1970, old age pensions will be paid without any means test, mind you, to every person aged 65 and over.
Now, this is precisely what the Ralliement Creditiste advocated during the 1962 and 1963 election campaigns. At that time, the Liberals, who are now trying to interrupt me, were afraid of inflation. But when such a suggestion comes from the Prime Minister of Canada, undoubtedly, inflation is no longer a danger.
Mr. Speaker, we are all for the payment of a monthly pension of $75 at age 65, but as pointed out earlier by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), what are we going to do about our older citizens until 1970?
At that time pensions of $75 a month will no longer be sufficient. Why not provide immediately for such an old age pension for

Introduction of Legislation the benefit of those who are 65 or older. In addition, people who have reached the age of 60 and who are in need could, after investigation if you wish, be given a similar pension which would enable them to live or at least to survive in their country, Canada.
Mr. Speaker, the statement made by the Prime Minister to the effect that such a pension will be paid in 1970 is nothing but window dressing. Tonight, some old people will feel pretty good when they hear on television the news that they are to get a pension of $75 a month at the age of 65. However, it will not be before they are 69 that they will be entitled to a pension of $75 a month.
At any rate, the pension of $75 a month announced by the Prime Minister and payable at the age of 65, starting in 1970, will no longer be sufficient at that time. I am sure that before 1970 we will have to consider the possibility of providing a pension of $100 a month for all Canadians who are 60 or over.
Consequently, Mr. Speaker, we shall support Bill No. C-136, amended as the Prime Minister just announced. Still, we feel that that is too little and that it is merely window dressing. The government will have to introduce more concrete and complete legislation to help Canadians who are 60 or over. [Text]



FINANCE


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of Stale for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table in French and English the texts of an agreement between the government of Canada and the inter-American development bank signed in New York on December 4, 1964.



FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION ACT


Mr. E. F. Whelan (Essex South) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-143, to amend the Financial Administration Act (discretionary garnishee against crown).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Eugene Whelan: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to remedy the grievance suffered by creditors who cannot collect their just debts from federal civil servants because the crown's certificate of employment is a certificate of protection against the garnishee of wages process of the courts.

More than 300 years ago the British House of Commons cleaned up a similar injury to the public caused by members who used their parliamentary privileges to protect their employees and servants against the debt processes of the courts. On November 28, 1661 the House of Commons passed the following resolution:
This house, taking into further debate the great grievances of the people occasioned by protections,
Resolves, that all protections, and written certificates of the members of this house, be declared void in law, and be forthwith withdrawn and called in, and that none be granted for the future. . . .
-and on January 31, 1781 the house amended the standing order to make it more effectual by adding a punishment:
and if any protection or written certificate shall be granted by any member, such member shall make satisfaction to the party injured, and shall be liable to the censure of the house.
For 304 years the treasury bench has sat on this example we members of the House of Commons set them. The government should now do what we did, either adopt this bill and wipe out this class privilege or, if it intends to perpetuate it, make satisfaction to the injured creditors.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. Orlikow: 1.	What is the total amount of money spent by the C.B.C. in each of the past three years on production of programs on (a) its French network (b) its English network (c) in Toronto (d) in Montreal?
2.	What is the total amount of money spent by the C.B.C. in each of the past three years on production of network programs on (a) its French network (b) its English network (c) in Toronto (d) in Montreal?


Hon. Maurice Lamoniagne (Secretary of State):: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows:
1.	Cost of program production:
(in $000's)
1962	1963	1964(a)	French network	22,021	21,843	24,685(b) English network	31,188	30,312	33,700(c)	in Toronto	25,553	24,195	26,298(d)	in Montreal	24,547	24,761	27,387
2. Cost of network
(a)	French network
(b)	English network
(c)	in Toronto
(d)	in Montreal
program production: 22,021	21,843	24,685
31,188 30,312 33,700 22,694 21,232 23,185 21,668 21,539 24,345


PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS WITHOUT TENDER
Mr. Lessard (St. Henry): What is the total amount of all contracts awarded or all orders placed by the Department of Public Works, without calling for public tenders, between July 1, 1957 and April 1, 1963?


Hon. Lucien Cardin (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.
Questions
accepted and how many rejected (c) what was the total value of grants made in 1963 (d) what are the comparable statistics for Saskatchewan for 1964, to date (e) what was the total amount of grants made by the Canada Council to each of the other nine provinces in the year 1963 and in 1964, to date?


Maurice Lamontagne: Because of section 13 of the Canada Council Act, the council is not an agent of Her Majesty; consequently, the government does not have records showing the statistics requested in this question, and the government has no power to direct the council to supply this information. The legal relationship was explained by the Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker on November 27, 1957 (Hansard, pp. 1558-9) and on June 18, 1958 (Hansard, p. 1389).


COMMENTATORS ON BROADCASTING NETWORKS
Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might thank hon. members for their implied good wishes in my new portfolio. I do not think I can do any better than try to follow the standards and example of my immediate predecessor for whom, I am sure, we have a great deal of respect and friendship, and a lot of sympathy.

During the period I have just mentioned, tenders called for construction and repairs totalled $14,593,839.33.
Contracts for emergency repairs were in the amount of $2,460,275.01.
Contracts for urgent requirements totalled $2,868,477.88.
For the period of April 1, 1960, to March 31, 1963, tenders called for purchase orders reached a total of $9,096,780.00.


BILINGUAL UNIFORM INSCRIPTIONS, R.C.M.P.
Mr. Pigeon: Is the Minister of Justice considering the possibility of having bilingual inscriptions on the caps and uniforms of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and, if not, for what reasons?


Mr. Favreau:: Of course, the answer is yes. [Text]


CANADA COUNCIL-GRANT APPLICATIONS FROM SASKATCHEWAN
Mr. Southam: Under the Canada Council Act of 1957 (a) how many applications for grants were received from the province of Saskatchewan in 1963 for the arts, humanities and social sciences (b) how many were

Question No. 1,705-Mr. Madill:
1.	How many English speaking commentators are on our English network?
2.	How many French speaking commentators are on our English network?
3.	How many English speaking commentators are on our French network?
4.	How many French speaking commentators are on our French network?


Maurice Lamontagne: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that, having been advised by the hon. member that his question relates to staff announcers and not commentators, as of November 30, 1964, there are 201 announcers, including announcer-operators and announcer-producers employed on the English networks and stations and there are 64 announcers including announcer-operators employed on the French networks and stations.


OBSERVANCE OF BIRTHDAY OF SIR JOHN A. MACDONALD
Mr. Macquarrie: 1.	Is the government planning for the national observance of the sesquicentennial of the birth of Canada's first prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, January 11, 1965 and, if so, what individuals or groups have been assigned responsibility for arranging such commemorative observances?
2.	What is the nature of any ceremonies already planned?
3.	Is the government co-operating with the government of the province of Ontario in arranging appropriate celebrations for this historic occasion?


Maurice Lamontagne: 1. (Answered on orders of the day, Hansard, November 10, 1964, page 9950).
2.	Ceremonies in co-operation with the province of Ontario, the city of Kingston and the Kingston historical society were held at

Questions
the city of Kingston on January 11, 1965 including a testimonial dinner at which the three levels of government were represented and which was partly financed through a grant from the centennial commission.
3.	Yes. Arrangements are being finalized for a permanent memorial in the city of Kingston to mark the occasion. The project will be financed jointly by the city of Kingston, the Ontario government and the federal government.


CANADA COUNCIL GRANTS
Mr. Smith: In the 1964-65 budget of the Canada Council, in the category, theatre, ballet and opera, what organizations are to receive grants and in what amounts?


Maurice Lamontagne: Because of section 13 of the Canada Council Act, the council is not an agent of Her Majesty; consequently, the government does not have records showing the statistics requested in this question, and the government has no power to direct the council to supply this information. The legal relationship was explained by the Right Hon. J. G. Diefen-baker on November 27, 1957 (Hansard, pp. 1558-9) and on June 18, 1958 (Hansard, p. 1389).


FEDERAL FACILITIES TO FLY FLAG
Mr. Coates: 1.	What is the estimated cost to the federal treasury that will result if a new flag design is approved by parliament?
2.	How many federal buildings are there within Canada either owned or rented by the federal government which presently have the necessary facilities to fly the Canadian flag?
3.	How many buildings either owned or rented by the government outside Canada have the necessary facilities to fly the Canadian flag?
4.	How many Canadian red ensigns of various sizes are presently the property of the Canadian government?


Mr. J. B. Stewart (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: 1. Many of the flags of the Canadian red ensign design withdrawn from service on February 15, 1965 were not new; accordingly, to state their financial value precisely would be impossible. The unit costs of new flags of the two designs will be approximately the same.
2.	3,801.
3.	323.
4.	17,515.


REPORTS ON CONDUCT OF HAL BANKS
Mr. Francis: 1.	Did the Department of Justice, in 1958, through the R.C.M.P., conduct an investigation to determine

if Hal Banks had been employing intimidation and violence in the furtherance of union activities?
2.	Did the government on February 23, 1959, as a result of the aforementioned investigation, receive a full account of the conspiracy which resulted in the Walsh beatings?
3.	Was any action taken by the government of that day to bring Banks to trial as a result of that evidence?
4.	Was another report, which included a further account of the Walsh conspiracy, sent on June 14, 1961, to the government by the Department of Justice?
5.	Was any action taken against Banks as a result of that evidence?
6.	On what date was the commission, concerning matters relating to the destruction of shipping on the great lakes, the St. Lawrence river system, and connecting waters, established?
7.	When did the commission report?
8.	When was action initiated by the government to prosecute Hal Banks?


Mr. D. S. Macdonald (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice):: 1. Yes. In November, 1958, the Minister of Justice instructed the R.C.M.P. to conduct an exploratory investigation into the activities of Hal Banks as information had been received which suggested that Banks was using his position and influence to intimidate other unions and when any degree of opposition was met, he was not hesitating to use force or threats of force.
2.	The R.C.M.P. advise that on February 23, 1959, they forwarded a preliminary report to the Minister of Justice, under secret cover, outlining the findings of their investigation into the activities of Hal Banks, which included an account of the conspiracy to beat Captain Walsh.
3.	No.
4.	The R.C.M.P. advise that on June 14, 1961, they forwarded a further report to the Minister of Justice, under secret cover, which enlarged on their findings with respect to Hal Banks and the general picture of the S.I.U. activities, including further information with respect to the beating of Captain Walsh.
5.	No.
6.	July 17, 1962.
7.	July 6, 1963.
8.	October 23, 1963.


ASSISTANCE FOR BOAT BUILDING INDUSTRY, CAPE BRETON
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
What consideration has been given by the Atlantic development board to the request contained in the brief presented by the municipalities of northern Cape Breton asking for financial assistance in setting up a boat building industry at the North Sydney marine railway?


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):: I am informed by the Atlantic development board as follows:
The Atlantic development board is continuing to discuss the adequacy of ship building and repair facilities in the region with other appropriate federal government departments and agencies.


CONSTRUCTION OF SERVICE WHARF, ALDER POINT, N.S.
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
What consideration has been given by the Atlantic development board to the request contained in the brief presented by the municipalities of northern Cape Breton that financial assistance be provided in the construction of a service wharf for use by the fishermen of the Cape Breton Cooperative Fisheries Limited of Alder Point, Nova Scotia?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am informed by the Atlantic development board as follows:
The Atlantic development board has considered the request for financial assistance for the construction of a service wharf for use by the Cape Breton Co-operative Fisheries Limited, Alder Point, Nova Scotia.
The board decided to defer a decision on this item for the present since it was considered that until the new plant of the Cape Breton Co-operative Fisheries Limited had been in operation for at least a full season, it was difficult to determine what, if any, additional wharf facilities might be required. It was also understood that the Department of Public Works intends, subject to the availability of funds, to carry out dredging immediately adjacent to the public wharf. This should provide additional berthing space for fishing vessels.


LIFE INSURANCE STATISTICS
Mr. Marcoux: 1.	How many life insurance policies are in effect in Canada?
2.	How many life insurance policies are in effect in the province of Quebec?
3.	What is the grand total of premiums paid in the province of Quebec and, of this sum, what percentage was paid to (a) French Canadian companies (b) English Canadian companies (c) foreign companies?
4.	What percentage of the premiums paid in the province of Quebec was reinvested in that province?
5.	What is the distribution of the holdings of these companies as reinvestments in the province of Quebec?
6.	What percentage of the Canadian population is covered by life insurance from life insurance companies?
Questions
7.	What percentage of the population of the province of Quebec is covered by life insurance from the said companies?
Answer: 1. The total number of life insurance policies in force in Canada as at December 31, 1963 in life insurance companies registered with the federal department of insurance was as follows:
Individual insurance policies-10,209,331 Group insurance policies -	40,401
Total-10,249,732
Under the group insurance policies, 6,233,209 individual certificates were in effect. The federal department of insurance does not receive reports concerning the number of insurance policies in force in provincially incorporated life insurance companies that are not registered with that department.
2.	The federal department of insurance does not receive reports concerning the number of life insurance policies in effect in the province of Quebec.
3.	The grand total of life insurance premiums paid in the province of Quebec to life insurance companies registered with the federal department of insurance during the year 1963 amounted to $289,001,000. Of this amount $169,226,000 was paid to life insurance companies incorporated in Canada and $119,773,000 was paid to life insurance companies incorporated outside Canada. The federal department of insurance does not receive reports concerning premiums paid in the province of Quebec to provincially incorporated life insurance companies that are not registered with that department. Furthermore, from information available it is not possible to establish what is a French Canadian company and what is an English Canadian company. For example, many companies are mutual and the policyholders are, in effect, the shareholders.
4.	This information is not available in the federal department of insurance.
5.	This information is not available in the federal department of insurance.
6.	Information available in the department of insurance relates to the number of policies in force but not to the number of individual persons covered by life insurance since there are many cases where one individual has more than one insurance policy in force on his life. Consequently, the information requested is not available in the federal department of insurance.

Questions
7.	This information is not available in the federal department of insurance for the reasons given in the answers to questions 1 and 6.


USE BY C.N.R. TRAINS OF PALAIS STATION, QUEBEC CITY
Mr. Marcoux: 1.	Has there been a substantial decrease in the number of Canadian National trains now using the Palais station in Quebec city since the years 1939 to 1955?
2.	Has the Department of National Defence paid maintenance costs of Quebec-Valcartier trains from 1939 to date?
3.	Is the rental now paid by the C.N.R. to the C.P.R. the same as that paid from 1939 to 1955 and, if so, for what reasons has the same rental been maintained?
4.	If the rental has been increased or decreased, what is the amount of any such decrease or increase and the reasons therefor?


Maurice Lamontagne: I am informed by the Departments of Transport and National Defence as follows:
1.	Yes.
2.	No, however the Department of National Defence has a spur track and siding into Camp Valcartier which was constructed in 1953 by Canadian National Railways on contract from the Department of National Defence, and an additional siding was constructed in 1957. Rental and maintenance charges are paid to the Canadian National Railways per agreement between the Department of National Defence and the railways. Rental charges are based on 6 per cent of the capital cost of C.N.R. owned non-perishable materials (rails, switches, car stops, etc.,) and are available for the life of the agreement. Maintenance charges are based on the actual cost of replacement of perishable materials (ties, planking, signs, etc.,) as well as weed control, snow clearing, etc.
These costs are:
	Maintenance	Rental
1953-54	$ -	$ 189.461954-55	-	516.761955-56	-	516.761956-57	-	516.761957-58	-	621.51
4.
Date	Successful bidder
21- 1-63 Riverdrive Motors Ltd.
28- 1-63	St. Paul Sales & Service Ltd.
21- 1-63	Edson Motor Co. Ltd.
4- 2-63	Pembina Motors Ltd.
4- 2-63	Edmonton Motors Ltd.

	Maintenance	Rental
1958-59	-	690.001959-60	632.12	690.001960-61	117.57	690.001961-62	641.12	690.001962-63	643.91	690.001963-64	1,241.39	690.001964 to	date 879.02	402.503 and 4.	Rental payments	are predicatedon the principles of the original agreement dated January 1,	1915, and supplements
thereto. Payments vary from month to month depending upon the proportion of use made of the station and facilities by the Canadian National Railways.


R.C.M.P. CAR PURCHASES, NORTHERN ALBERTA
Mr. Horner (Jasper-Edson): 1.	How are the R.C.MJP. buying cars In northern Alberta?
2.	Has there been any change in the past year?
3.	Who are the dealers in all of northern Alberta who submitted bids in the past two years?
4.	Who were the successful bidders and at what prices in 1963 and in 1964?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: 1. Tenders are submitted directly to Chrysler, Ford and General Motors manufacturers, who in turn submit their lowest tender to the force.
2.	Yes. Tenders were previously sent to dealers as opposed to the present system of sending tenders to the Chrysler, Ford and General Motors manufacturers.
3.	In 1963, all bona fide dealers in each R.C.M. Police detachment area where cars were to be purchased were given an opportunity to tender, with the exception of Edmonton, Alberta, where tenders for two cars were received from Edmonton Motors Ltd., Jenner Motors Ltd., Healy Motors Ltd., Miller Motors Ltd., Turnbull Motors Ltd. and Don Wheaton Ltd. at Edmonton. In 1964, tenders were submitted directly to Chrysler, Ford and General Motors manufacturers, and no dealers were requested to submit tenders.
Location	Net price
Peace River, Alta.	$ 3,120.01 (2 cars)
Lac La Biche, Alta.	1,439.25
Edson, Alta.	1,111.27
Westlock, Alta.	1,333.55
Edmonton, Alta.	2,061.00

Questions
Date 18- 2-63 18- 2-63 18- 2-63 18- 2-63 20- 2-63 13- 3-63	Successful bidder Ratcliffe Garage Co. Ltd. Mayerthorpe Motors Herb Lowe's Garage Ltd. Father Motors Cold Lake Motors Ltd. Crosstown Motors Ltd.
12- 3-63	Pembina Motors Ltd.
14- 3-63 14- 3-63 1- 4-63 1- 4-63	International Harvester Co. Ltd. J. M. Crummy Garage Co. Ltd. Barth & Gosset Motors Healy Motors Ltd.
1- 4-63	Edmonton Motors Ltd.
1- 4-63 1- 4-63 3- 4-63 3- 5-63 23- 5-63 27- 5-63 27- 5-63	Crockett Motors Riverdrive Motors Ltd. Thomson Motors Co. Ltd. Northern Supply J. Mayer & Son Ltd. Don Wheaton Motors Turnbull Motors Ltd.
6- 6-63 10- 7-63	Riverdrive Motors Ltd. Healy Motors Ltd.
20- 6-63 20-	6-63 27- 6-63 9- 7-63 18-10-63 21-	10-63	Andrew Motors Edson Motor Co. Ltd. Smoky Lake Motors Bell Motors (Barrhead) Ltd. Thomson Motors Co. Ltd. Rodacker Sales & Service Ltd.
4-11-63	Don Wheaton Motors
4-11-63 12-11-63 12-11-63 18-11-63 18-11-63	Malowany's Garage Ikes Modern Motors Graham Gardiner Co. Ltd. Ikes Modern Motors Jenner Motors Co. Ltd.
25-11-63 16-12-63 16-12-63 30-12-63	Forseth Motors Ltd. Waterloo Motors Ltd. St. Paul Sales & Service Landing Motors Ltd.
From January 1, 1964 to October 31, 1964
13- 1-64	Stony Plain Motors Ltd.
25- 2-64	Riverdrive Motors Ltd.
2- 4-64	International Harvester Co. of Canada
2- 4-64	Edmonton Motors Ltd.
2- 4-64	Jenner Motors Ltd.
9- 6-64	Stanley Motors
9- 6-64	Frank's North Star Service
9- 6-64	Turnbull Motors Ltd.
11- 5-64	Swekla & Son Sales Ltd.
Location	Net price
Spirit River, Alta.	1,464.15
Mayerthorpe, Alta.	939.98
Fairview, Alta.	996.20
McLennan, Alta.	1,304.23
Cold Lake, Alta.	972.20
Edmonton, Alta.	4,075.93
	(3 cars)
Westlock, Alta.	2,504.50
	(2 cars)
Swan Hills, Alta.	2,466.75
Grande Prairie, Alta.	1,552.79
Stony Plain, Alta.	850.00
Edmonton, Alta.	12,192.00
	(6 cars)
Edmonton, Alta.	6,388.54
	(2 cars)
Whitecourt, Alta.	994.00
Peace River, Alta.	1,747.11
Grande Prairie, Alta.	2,484.40
Manning, Alta.	1,298.00
Stony Plain, Alta.	955.20
Mayerthorpe, Alta.	1,588.85
Edmonton, Alta.	4,499.00
	(4 cars)
Peace River, Alta.	1,506.83
Edmonton, Alta.	5,369.00
	(4 cars)
Andrew, Alta.	1,374.00
Edson, Alta.	883.20
Smoky Lake, Alta.	1,288.05
Swan Hills, Alta.	2,530.15
Valleyview, Alta.	$ 1,117.02
Grande Prairie, Alta.	2,458.54
	(2 cars)
Edmonton, Alta.	11,241.33
	(8 cars)
Redwater, Alta.	1,010.74
Faust, Alta.	1,527.23
Derwent, Alta.	1,477.00
Slave Lake, Alta.	1,527.23
Edmonton, Alta.	5,981.00
	(4 cars)
Peace River, Alta.	1,307.85
Evansburg, Alta.	974.00
St. Paul, Alta.	786.80
Athabasca, Alta.	1,433.90
Evansburg, Alta.	1,156.20
Peace River, Alta.	1,386.77
High Level, Alta.	2,616.00
Edmonton, Alta.	1,633.00
Edmonton, Alta.	950.00
High Level, Alta.	2,319.65
Peace River, Alta.	2,269.65
Edmonton, Alta.	2,269.65
Vegreville, Alta.	744.65

Questions
Date	Successful bidder
4- 5-64	McLeod River Tourist Service Ltd.
3- 6-64	Barth & Gossett Motors
18- 6-64	Waterloo Motors Ltd.
13- 7-64	Jenner Motors Ltd.
11- 8-64	Sargeant Motors
26-10-64	St. Paul Sales & Service
BERNARD	A. GRAHAM-ABSENCE FROM OTTAWA


Mr. Coales: 1.	How many days between July 20, 1964, and October 15, 1964, was Bernard Alasdair Graham away from Ottawa on official government business?
2.	How many of the aforementioned days were spent in Nova Scotia?
3.	In what places in Nova Scotia were these days spent and how many days in each place?
4.	What were Mr. Graham's total expenses for the aforementioned days spent away from Ottawa and what is the breakdown from the point of view of meals and lodgings?
5.	How many days has Mr. Graham spent in Ottawa between July 20, 1964, and October 15, 1964?
6.	What were his total expenses for these days and what is the breakdown from the point of view of meals and lodgings?
7.	Was Mr. Graham provided with a special expense allowance to move his furnishings and family to Ottawa and, if so, what is the amount of this special allowance?


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of Labour):: 1.	Thirty days.
2.	Twenty seven days.
3.	Sydney 4 days; North Sydney 1 day; St. Peter's one day; Port Hawkesbury one day; Inverness three days; Antigonish two days; New Glasgow one day; Truro one day; Amherst one day; Halifax eight days; Bridgewater one day; Lunenburg one day; Kent-ville one day; and Digby one day.
4.	Total expense including transportation $823.95. Meals $196.40, lodging $61.60.
5.	Fifty eight days.
6.	Nil.
7.	No.


SEA TIME OF S.I.U. OFFICERS
Mr. Thompson: How much actual sea time has each of the present officers of the seafarers international union accumulated with what rank and on what ship?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: The board of trustees advise that information concerning the actual amount of sea time is a matter of personal record. It has been established, however, that each of the officers who were candidates in the recent election

Location	Net price
Whitecourt, Alta.	2,017.27
Stony Plain, Alta.	1,644.65
Edmonton, Alta.	1,614.60
Edmonton, Alta.	1,663.00
Grande Prairie, Alta.	2,403.00
St. Paul, Alta.	2,357.00
of the S.I.U. met the requirements stipulated for sea time.


*ROYAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS RESPECTING DRUG ADDICTION
Mr. Basford: 1.	What general consideration has the government given to the implementation of the Hall commission report recommendations on drug addiction as distinct from the recommendations as a whole?
2.	Specifically, have psychiatric services in prisons and penitentiaries been improved to deal adequately with the problem of addiction and other psychiatric disorders?
3.	Specifically, has further experimentation in the registration of addicts and in providing them with narcotics under strict medical and narcotic control supervision been undertaken?


John B. Stewart: 1. The recommendations on drug addiction are being considered by the appropriate authorities concerned with this problem.
2.	Psychiatric services in penitentiaries have been improved in relation to the availability of properly qualified professional personnel.
3.	No. This course is not one that is medically recommended.


PROSECUTION OF INCOME TAX CASE, TORONTO
Mr. Fisher: 1.	Has there been a case before the courts in which Morris Black and Samuel Ciglen of Toronto were arraigned on charges of evading payment of income tax and, if so, what is the present status of this case?
2.	Did the crown appoint a special prosecutor and, if so, from whom in the government did the investigation go to such special prosecutor?
3.	Who is the special prosecutor, including his age, educational background and qualifications and experience?
4.	Has this special prosecutor ever had previous
cases for the crown and, if so, what were the cases and what was the final disposition in each case?	.
5.	Has the Minister of Justice or the Minister of National Revenue received any complaints in any form about the competence of the special prosecutor in the Black-Ciglen case?
6.	What moneys have been paid to this date to the special prosecutor?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: 1. Yes, the trial is proceeding.
2.	Two counsel are presently employed on the case as agents of the Minister of Justice.
3.	They are Walter B. Williston, Q.C., and Paul Hess, Q.C., both of Toronto. Mr. Williston was called to the Ontario bar in 1944 and appointed queen's counsel in 1954. Mr. Hess was called to the Ontario bar in 1944 and appointed queen's counsel in 1960. Both enjoy reputations as experienced and able counsel.
4.	Prior to his employment on the Ciglen-Black case Mr. Williston was retained as agent to the Minister of Justice from time to time since June 1953 in relation to the following matters:
(a)	Seven actions arising out of motor vehicle accidents. Four were settled before trial. One action against the crown was dismissed and one allowed by the court. In one case the court apportioned negligence equally between the crown and the suppliant.
(b)	Three prosecutions, all of which were successful. One prosecution was under the Unemployment Insurance Act; one under the Income War Tax Act and the Income Tax Act; and one under the Combines Investigation Act.
(c)	The successful defence of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation on a charge under the Lord's Day Act.
(d)	Seventy petitions of right claiming damages arising out of the imposition of airport zoning regulations at Malton. Sixty seven cases were settled, two claims were dismissed and one allowed by the court.
(e)	Claims involving one company and nine individuals arising out of expropriation of property for Malton airport. These claims were all settled. In addition there were negotiations for the purchase of property for the airport from four individuals.
(f)	Action by the crown for the eviction of an individual from crown lands. Crown's claim for possession allowed by the court.
(g)	Claim for damages by workman injured by explosion of aircraft canopy ejector. Settled by payment of damages.
(h)	Action for damages on behalf of the dependents of a person killed in an aircraft accident. Settled by payment of damages.
(i)	Action by attorney general of Canada to set aside the sale of a patent to a company in which the vendor was a shareholder. Action dismissed. This case arose out of considerations relating to the payment of income tax by the company.
Questions
(j)	Action against the crown arising out of injuries sustained in an aircraft accident. Settled by payment of a portion of the damages claimed.
(k)	Application for habeas corpus on behalf of a person detained under the authority of the Immigration Act. Application abandoned.
(l)	Action against Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for alleged breach of agreement to purchase land. Land purchased by province of Ontario. Action dismissed with consent of plaintiff.
(m)	Action for succession duties. Crown's claim allowed by exchequer court, but judgment reversed by Supreme Court of Canada.
(n)	Action against Defence Construction Limited for rental of sump pump. Action settled by payment of portion of claim.
(o)	Action against the director, Veterans' Land Act, arising out of the purchase of real estate by the director. There were many issues in this complicated litigation and success between the parties might be described as divided.
Prior to his employment on the Ciglen-Black case Mr. Hees was retained on March 26, 1954, and on May 14, 1956, in relation to two prosecutions under the Combines Investigation Act. The accused were convicted in both cases.
5.	No.
6.	As reported by the Department of National Revenue, fees paid to Mr. Williston to date total $16,195.00 and fees paid to Mr Hess to date total $7,972.50.


HARNESSING OF BAY OF FUNDY TIDES
Mr. Coates: What is the present state of the investigation into the economic feasibility of the harnessing of the bay of Fundy tides from the power point of view?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am informed by the Atlantic development board as follows:
The Atlantic development board late in 1963 commissioned an engineering investigation into foundation conditions in the Cumberland basin-Shepody bay area, upper bay of Fundy. The report which was received in June 1964 established that foundation conditions at Shepody bay and Cumberland basin indicate the engineering feasibility of tidal power development at these sites. However, more detailed engineering would be necessary before the economics of the project could be determined.

Questions
The board has under active discussion and consideration at present the scope of future studies on the technical and economic aspects of tidal power development in the bay of Fundy, including Minas basin.


FLYING OF RED ENSIGN, FORESTRY BUILDING, QUEBEC CITY
Mr. Coates: 1.	On what date, and on whose Instructions, was the Canadian red ensign no longer flown from the forestry building at Quebec city?
2.	What are the reasons for such an action?
3.	Were any incidents reported relating to the flying of the Canadian red ensign from the aforementioned building?


Mr. B. S. Beer (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Forestry):: 1. On February 28, 1964, after consultation with departmental headquarters.
2.	This decision was taken after repeated acts of vandalism resulting in the cutting of the halyard and, on three occasions during the preceding months, the theft of the flag.
3.	The incidents noted above were reported to the local police and those concerning the theft of the flag were also reported to the R.C.M.P.


QUEBEC-CONSTRUCTION OF CENTENNIAL BUILDINGS
Mr. Ricard: Was there any agreement between the government of the province of Quebec and the federal government concerning the construction of cultural centres or other buildings to commemorate the centennial and, if so, (a) on what date were such agreements signed (b) in what municipalities will such centres or buildings be erected, and (c) what sum has the federal government granted in each such case?


Maurice Lamontagne: I am informed by the centennial commission as follows:
Yes. (a) The agreement was signed on 28 January, 1964. (b) The agreement requires prior approval by the provincial authorities of applications submitted by municipalities and the centennial commission has not yet received submissions from the province of Quebec, (c) Answered by (b).


PUBLIC SERVICE APPOINTMENTS AND DISMISSALS
Mr. Ricard: Since April 8, 1963 (a) how many civil servants have been hired by (i) order in council (ii) civil service commission competition (b) how many civil servants have been dismissed (c) how many civil servants have been superannuated?


An hon. Member:: Stand.


Mr. Speaker:: Stand.


Mr. Ricard:: On a question of privilege, I think the parliamentary secretary was just about to answer my question. It has been on the order paper for three months now.


John B. Stewart: I am quite ready to answer starred question 2,305. I thought there was some objection. The answer is as follows:
(a)	(i) when appointments are made by order in council, the appointees are not classified as civil servants, (ii) The number of civil servants employed as the result of civil service competitions from April 1, 1963 to October 31, 1964, is 28,143.
While this number represents the total number of appointments to the civil service as the result of civil service competitions, it includes a number of persons who were already employed in the civil service or public service and who received new appointments as a result of these competitions. Our statistical records do not contain the information required to ascertain the exact number in each of these groups.
(b)	321.
(c)	5,158.


MINISTER RESPONSIBLE FOR EASTERN AGRICULTURE
Mr. Martineau: Who is the minister responsible for eastern agriculture?


Mr. Jack Davis (Parliamentary Secretary to Prime Minister):: Federal agriculture policies are administered by the Minister of Agriculture except those relating to freight assistance on western feed grain, maritime marshland rehabilitation and agricultural rehabilitation and development which are administered by the Minister of Forestry.


CHANGE OF NAME OF HARRINGTON LAKE
Mr. Pigeon: 1.	Since May 1, 1963, has the federal government officially requested Quebec government authorities to have the name of Harrington lake, the Prime Minister's summer residence, changed to Lac Mousseau, or some other French name and, if not, for what reason?
2.	Does the federal government intend to take the necessary steps to effect such change and if so, when?


Hon. W. M. Benidickson (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: 1. No. The Canadian permanent committee on geographical names does not request that a geographical name be changed without sufficient reason to indi-

cate that the new name has more validity than the present one. In this case, the use of both names is recommended by the geographic board of Quebec.
2. No.


REMOVAL OF S.I.U. RECORDS
Mr. Orlikow: 1.	What action was taken by the government to investigate the circumstances of the unlawful removal of records, including the 'do-not-ship' list from the S.I.U. hall in Montreal?
2.	Has the government any information when and by whom these lists were removed?
3.	Has the government any information as to where the lists are now?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: 1 and 2. There has been no unlawful removal of records from the S.I.U. hall in Montreal to the knowledge of the board of trustees. The trustees are informed that some records of the S.I.U. in Montreal were disposed of prior to the trusteeship at the direction of the executive board of the union.
3. Information concerning names that were at one time included in these lists is contained in the report of the Norris inquiry on the disruption of shipping and in some of the exhibits that were filed with the inquiry.


PURCHASE OF PROPERTY BY DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD
Mr. Coates: Has any deputy minister, associate deputy minister, assistant deputy minister, or officer ranked as a deputy head of the federal government, leased or purchased any property from the federal government or Crown Assets Disposal Corporation since June, 1963 and, if so (a) who were the officers (b) what was the property in question, and (c) what were the terms of lease or purchase?


Maurice Lamontagne: Yes, a single story former canal staff dwelling at Elgin, R.R. 4, near Davis lock, vacant for some time, earlier intended for demolition and not habitable without extensive repair and renovation, was rented to the deputy minister of transport for cottage use. The rent, $258, was determined after appraisal on the basis of the standard percentage of value formula employed by the department in leases of this sort. The lease was a standard one but also provided that the tenant assume all costs of repair, renovation and continuing maintenance. The lease may be cancelled at any time on notice, and repairs and improvements become the property of the crown on cancellation or termination. These arrangements were made during the winter of 1963-64, with the knowledge and approval of the Minister of Transport.
Questions


TENDERS FOR BUZZER SYSTEM, CLAXTON BUILDING, OTTAWA
Mr. Loney: 1.	What are the names and addresses of the tenderers in connection with the tender for supply and installation of a new buzzer system for the Brooke Claxton building, Tunney's pasture, Ottawa, Ontario?
2.	What was the price quoted by each tenderer?
3.	Was the lowest tender accepted and, if not. for what reason?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: 1. and 2. A. G. Reed Ltd., 356 McRae Avenue, Ottawa, $12,170; Stanley G. Brookes Ltd., 143 First Avenue, Ottawa, $12,500; J. C. Robinson & Sons Ltd., 1180 Heron Road, Ottawa, $14,365; Economy Electric, 2045 Bank street, Ottawa, $15,041.10; R. E. Ferguson Ltd., 260 Tremblay road, Ottawa, $17,420; Goldstein Bros. Ltd., 205 Bank street, Ottawa, $17,450; Gaston Dompierre Electrical Contractors, 153 Fontaine street, Hull, Que., $20,799.
3. Yes.


TENDERS FOR ALTERATIONS, R.C.M.P. HEADQUARTERS, OTTAWA
Mr. Loney: 1.	What are the names and addresses of the tenderers in connection with the tender for general alterations at the R.C.M.P. headquarters, Tremblay road, Ottawa, Ontario?
2.	What was the price quoted by each tenderer?
3.	Was the lowest tender accepted and, if not, for what reason?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: 1. and 2. Coady Construction Limited, Ottawa, $21,613; J. R. Statham Construction Limited, Ottawa, $21,790; A. Lanctot Construction Limited, Ottawa, $24,526; Deljac Construction Co. Limited, Ottawa, $24,690; C. P. Construction Limited, Ottawa, $24,860; Beaudoin Construction Limited, Ottawa, $29,843; Pillar Construction Limited, Ottawa, $31,677.
3. The lowest tender has been accepted.


MEAT INSPECTION-BILINGUAL APPROVAL STAMPS
Mr. Cote (Chicoutimi): Do the meat inspection services of the federal government now have bilingual stamps reading "Canada Approved" and "Qualite Canada" to be applied on meat carcasses in all slaughterhouses throughout Canada recognized by the Department of Agriculture and, if not, for what reason has this change not been made and, as it has been requested for over a year, when is it the intention to make it?


Bruce Silas Beer: The meat inspection service of the federal government does not

Questions
have bilingual stamps reading "Canada Approved" and "Qualite Canada." The Canada Department of Agriculture has been investigating actively a means of providing an inspection stamp or stamps which would adequately serve the two official languages.
There are two ways of providing for this. One is to have separate stamps or legends for the two languages. This approach, after careful investigation, has been rejected since it would in many instances require firms to maintain a double inventory of stamps and labels because certain importing countries of Canadian meat products require the inspection legend to be in English.
The other approach, which the department is now pursuing, is a single stamp or legend which would be bilingual in nature yet sufficiently concise as to retain the distinctive trade mark nature of the present stamp which has come to be widely recognized in Canada and internationally as the mark of Canadian veterinary meat inspection.
At the present time consideration is being given at the international level, through
O.E.C.D., to develop a common form of meat inspection stamp for use by member countries. It is desirable that the Canadian legend should conform as closely as possible to any recommendation which might be made by
O.E.C.D. and action with respect to a revised Canadian legend is being withheld in the meantime.


PAMPHLET &quot;PROGRESS OF THE COLOMBO PLAN&quot;
Mr. Cantelon: 1.	Who authorized the publication "Progress of the Colombo Plan"?
2.	What is its total cost?
3.	What is the distribution?
4.	Who printed it?


Mr. Stanley Haidasz (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State for External Affairs):: 1. The Colombo plan bureau in Ceylon.
2.	40,000 Ceylon rupees.
3.	Copies were distributed to all 22 Colombo plan countries.
4.	Topan Printing Co. Ltd., Tokyo.


R.C.M.P. PURCHASE OF CHINAWARE
Mr. Pigeon: 1.	Since May 1, 1963, did the R.C.M.P. purchase any chinaware and, if so (a) was it of Canadian or foreign origin (b) what was the total amount of purchases in each case?
2.	If the R.C.M.P. did purchase chinaware of foreign origin, for what reasons was Canadian made chinaware not purchased?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: 1. Yes.
(a)	Orders were placed through Canadian suppliers for chinaware of English manufacture.
(b)	May 1,	1963,	$365; Oct. 23,	1963,
$487.49; Feb. 5, 1964, $270.; Oct. 29, 1964, $421.56.
2.	Canadian made chinaware was not purchased as it was desired to match the pattern of existing dishes in use throughout the R.C.M. Police messes and northern outposts.


VETERANS AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT PURCHASE OF CHINAWARE
Mr. Pigeon: 1.	Since May 1, 1963, did the Department of Veterans Affairs purchase any chinaware and. if so (a) was it of Canadian or foreign origin (b) what was the total amount of purchases in each
2.	If the department did purchase chinaware of foreign origin, for what reasons was Canadian made chinaware not purchased?


Hon. Roger Teillei (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: 1. Yes. From May 1, 1963, to November 30, 1964, the Department of Veterans Affairs purchased for its various hospitals a total of 2,910J dozen pieces of vitrified institutional weight chinaware at a total cost of $14,273.77.
(a)	There were 2,743| dozen pieces of Canadian origin and 167 dozen pieces of foreign origin.
(b)	The pieces having a Canadian origin cost the department $13,049.26. The pieces having a foreign origin cost the department $1,224.51.
2. Foreign origin chinaware was purchased because:
(a)	items required were not available from a Canadian pottery, or
(b)	items were urgently required and local suppliers could not furnish Canadian merchandise of the types required.


C.N.R. PURCHASE OF CHINAWARE
Mr. Pigeon: 1.	Since May 1, 1963, did the C.N.R. purchase any chinaware and. if so (a) was it of Canadian or foreign origin (b) what was the total amount of purchases in each case?
2.	If the C.N.R. did purchase chinaware of foreign origin, for what reasons was Canadian made chinaware not purchased?


Mr. Jean-Charles Cantin (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport):: The
management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
1.	During the period May 1963 to November 1964, the Canadian National purchased

aoout $112,000 worth of chinaware, of which 20 per cent was of Canadian origin and the balance of foreign make.
2.	It is company policy to buy for use in Canada materials, equipment and supplies of Canadian origin wherever possible. A product of foreign manufacture is purchased only in cases where no suitable alternatives is produced in Canada or where the foreign product has cost or other advantages that cannot be matched by Canadian suppliers. In this instance, the chinaware purchased from foreign sources was of a type not made by or available from Canadian firms.


T.C.A. PURCHASE OF CHINAWARE
Mr. Pigeon: 1.	Since May 1, 1963, did T.C.A. purchase any chinaware and, if so (a) was it of Canadian or foreign origin (b) what was the total amount of purchases in each case?
2.	If T.C.A. did purchase chinaware of foreign origin, for what reasons was Canadian made chinaware not purchased?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The
management of Trans-Canada Air Lines advise as follows:
1 and 2. From May 1, 1963, to date Trans-Canada Air Lines purchased $25,000 worth of English bone chinaware from Royal Stafford, Staffordshire, England. This includes $15,000 spent last July for the introduction of chinaware on the first class DC-8 domestic service.
Canadian made chinaware was not purchased because Trans-Canada Air Lines have been unable to locate a Canadian source offering a product of comparable quality, although there is a Quebec firm which has been provided with samples of Trans-Canada Air Lines chinaware, in the hope that it can match the quality and colour.


TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT PURCHASE OF CHINAWARE
Mr. Pigeon: 1.	Since May I, 1963, did the Department of Transport purchase any chinaware and, if so (a) was it of Canadian or foreign origin (b) what was the total amount of purchase in each case?
2.	If the department did purchase chinaware of foreign origin, for what reason was Canadian made chinaware not purchased?


Jean-Charles Cantin: 1. Yes,
(a)	both, (b) Canadian origin, $6,340.39, Foreign origin, $6,439.06.
2. Reasons for purchase of foreign origin chinaware were as follows:
Questions
(a)	Canadian manufacturer quoted higher prices.
(b)	Items not quoted on by Canadian manufacturer.
(c)	Replacements were for part sets of chinaware previously purchased from other firms.
(d)	Small quantities requested were part of a lengthy list of household effects purchased from one only supplier.


INDUSTRY DEPARTMENT PURCHASE OF CHINAWARE
Mr. Pigeon: 1.	Since May 1, 1963, did the Department of Industry purchase any chinaware and, if so (a) was it of Canadian or foreign origin (b) what was the total amount of purchases in each case?
2.	If the department did purchase chinaware of foreign origin, for what reason was Canadian made chinaware not purchased?


Hon. C. M. Drury (Minister of Industry):: 1 and 2. No.


GROUND TRANSPORT TO AIRPORTS
Mr. Howe (Hamilton South): Does the Department of Transport exercise any control over the choice of firms providing ground transportation for Air Canada and, if so (a) what standards of safety and comfort are set and, (b) how are these standards enforced?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The
department enters into contracts for ground transportation service with operators who hold provincial public vehicle licences.
The contracts provide for transportation to and from the airport to meet the scheduled flights, and that vehicles shall be of recent manufacture, neat and maintained in good running condition.
Air Canada also negotiates service contracts with the operators. The operators work closely with Air Canada to maintain a satisfactory standard of service, and at major airports the operators deal with an air line committee.


MONEY LOST THROUGH CHEQUE TAMPERING
Mr. Howe (Hamilton South): Does any department of the government keep records of money lost through tampering with cheques and, if so, what was the total loss in each of the last five years?

Questions


Mr. L. T. Pennell (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance):: After encashment each cheque drawn on the Receiver General of Canada is reconciled to the amount in which it was originally issued, by the comptroller of the treasury. If the amount claimed by the encashing bank exceeds the amount for which the cheque was originally issued due to the cheque having been raised, settlement is made with the encashing bank for the original amount, the excess being a responsibility of the encashing bank. In addition, if evidence is produced that a bank has cashed a cheque on a forged endorsement, the amount involved is recovered from that bank.
In neither case is there any loss of public funds due to tampering with cheques.


LIFE INSURANCE ON CIVIL SERVANTS
Mr. Cote (Chicoutimi): 1.	Can members of parliament obtain life insurance on the same terms as employees of the civil service commission and. if not. for what reason?
2.	What is the total amount of premiums on life insurance policies in force to cover federal employees and what is the number of participants in this federal government life insurance fund?
3.	What are the total assets of the federal life insurance fund and what are its reserves?
4.	What is the breakdown of investments in the life insurance fund?
5.	Where can details relevant to the federal life insurance fund be found?
[Translation1


Lawrence T. Pennell: 1. No. The "life insurance" in question is provided by the supplementary death benefit plan under part II of the Public Service Superannuation Act which does not apply to members of parliament.
2.	(a) During the fiscal year 1963-64 the contributions by public service participants under this plan and by the government in respect of them was $4,729,765.
(b) As at March 31, 1964 there were 187,351 public service participants, both active and retired, covered by this plan.
3.	The assets as represented by the balance in the public service death benefit account amounted to $8,612,025 as at March 31, 1964. The last actuarial valuation of this account as at December 31, 1962 reported a contingency reserve of $3,655,000 at that time when
the total assets of the account amounted to $7,342,000.
4.	This account forms part of the consolidated revenue fund. The government pays interest at the end of each quarter on the balance to the credit of the account at the end of the preceding quarter.
5.	Additional information may be obtained from
(1)	Report on the administration of the Public Service Superannuation Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1963 which was tabled on February 28, 1964,
(2)	Report on actuarial examination of the public service death benefit account in the consolidated revenue fund as at December 31, 1962 which was tabled on November 12, 1964. [Text]


COMMITTEE ON INSECTICIDES
Mr. Howe (Hamilton: South):
Has the government established a committee on insecticides, including representatives from the Departments of Agriculture, Forestry, Northern Affairs and National Resources and, if so (a) under whose authority was it established (b) when was it established (c) how often has it met. and (d) when, and to whom, is it expected to report?


Hon. Harry W. Hays (Minister of Agriculture):: Yes, as recorded in Hansard, August 12, 1964, p. 6715, starred question No. 1,688. (a) The federal interdepartmental committee on pesticides was established by cabinet order on July 9, 1964. (b) See above, (c) Three times, (d) The committee is required to meet at least twice a year. It has met and reported three times. The committee reports to the Minister of Agriculture following each meeting.


CONTRACTS FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE BUILDING, JASPER PARK
Mr. Horner (Jasper-: Edson):
1.	What firms have had contracts for road building and bridge building in Jasper national park since April 1963?
2.	Have any extras been approved and. If so. in what amount and to whom?


Hon. Arthur Laing (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: 1. and 2.
Additional payments were made after consideration by and approval of treasury board as set out in the two attached tables.

Contracts Awarded Since April 1, 1963
Contract No.	Contractor	Description	Original Contract Amount	Increased Quantities and/or Extra Work Amount	Description of Extras and Major Reasons4/63/BJ	J. A. Moulson Contracting Ltd.	Grading, culverts and base course, mile 115 to 125 and mile 139.5 to 140-Banff-Jasper highway	$ 841,947.00	*151,009.00	Addition of road mix to contract cause for increase.6/63/J	Square M Construction & Coleman Collieries Ltd.	Grading and seal coat, mile 0-9.5, Medicine Lake, Maligne Lake Rd.	349,675.35	123,255.00	Road mix used in place of seal coat. Considerable amount of unsuitable material was encountered and replaced with granular material which resulted in a large overrun in common excavation and overhaul quantities.14/63/BJ & JE	E. Lobe Contracting Ltd.	Installation of guide rail, Banff-Jasper and Jasper-Edmonton highway	32,000.00	Nil	N/A6/64/JE	New West Construction Ltd.	Grading, culverts and base course, mile 11.1 to 19.9 and asphalt concrete pavement mile 0 to 19.9	1,473,328.00	Nil	N/A13/64/BJ	New West Construction Ltd.	Grading, drainage, base course, road mix, Miette river bridge, mile 140 to 143.7	392,820.75	Nil	N/A5/63/BJ	Standard Gravel and Surfacing of Canada Ltd.	Paving mile 125-140, Banff-Jasper highway	301,367.00	Nil	N/A
Contracts Awarded Prior to April 1, 1963 and Continuing:
18/61/JE	W. C Arnett & Co. Ltd.	Grading, culverts, base course and seal coat-mile 0 to 11 and Snaring river bridge-Jasper-Ed monton highway	*1,131,854.28	*150,000.00	Unsuitable material encountered on sections of the old grade had to be removed and replaced with granular material-as a result, common excavation quantities overran considerably.7/61/BJ	Square M Construction & Coleman Collieries Ltd.	Grading, culverts and base course, mile 115 to 139-Banff-Jasper highway. Finalized in April	1,287,791.60	255,250.00	More excavation classified as rock was encountered than was originally estimated. Unsuitable borrow pits necessitated an increase in haul quantities.
Questions

Questions


POLICY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF JASPER PARK
Mr. Horner (Jasper-Edson): 1.	Was the hotel-lodge complex proposed for Jasper national park turned down and, if so, for what reason?
2.	Has the government decided on any policy as a result of the Oberlander report on Jasper and, if not, when can the residents of Jasper expect some concrete statement as to future plans for their townsite?


Arthur Laing: 1. A proposal for the construction of an hotel on a prominent site outside the townsite of Jasper has been turned down for the time being. The national parks branch are currently studying the report on the Jasper townsite prepared by Dr. Oberlander and the submissions with respect to it which have been made by the Jasper chamber of commerce and the Edmonton chamber of commerce with a view to the establishment of an over-all plan for Jasper area development.
2.	An announcement has already been made in Jasper that street improvements have been planned for this year. A statement respecting sites for housing, church and motel developments will be made in the near future.


WINTER WORKS PROJECTS, JASPER PARK
Mr. Horner (Jasper-Edson): 1.	When will additional residential lots be made available in Jasper park townsite?
2.	Could these lots not be made available now to encourage winter house building?
3.	What other winter work projects are being carried out in Jasper national park this winter?


Arthur Laing: 1. It is
planned to make residential lots available to qualified residents of Jasper townsite by this April in accordance with the national parks policy announced by the government on September 18, 1964.
2.	No, since the period prior to April is required to select appropriate sites for residential development, for the drafting of the conditions under which these lots will be leased and for calling tenders.
3.	A regular work program is being carried out in Jasper national park during the winter months.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FUND
Mr. Howe (Hamilton: South):
1.	As of November 30, 1964, what is the financial state of the unemployment insurance fund?

2.	What are its future prospects?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: 1.	On November 30, 1964, the unemployment insurance fund showed a credit balance of $75,402,411.24.
2.	It is expected that the contributions to the unemployment insurance fund will continue to increase the financial state of the fund until some time this month. Starting in January 1965 it is expected that the outgo from the fund will exceed its income.


NAPANEE, ONT.-GRANT IN LIEU OF TAXES
Mr. Alkenbrack: Would the minister give immediate attention to the payment to the town of Napanee, by this government of the grant in lieu of taxes on federal property in the town for the current year in the amount of $9,000, the same needed at this time in the fiscal economy of the town?


Lawrence T. Pennell: Before the 1964 grant in lieu of taxes to the town of Napanee can be determined it is necessary for a representative of the municipal grants division to visit the town in order to review the federal property assessments. The visit cannot be carried out until early in 1965. To assist the town, an interim payment will be made this month in the amount of $7,500.


ADVANCES IN CANCER TREATMENT
Mr. Mather: Has any significant advance been made in the successful treatment of cancer during the past ten years?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: While cancer continues to be a major cause of death, there have been important advances in treatment and improvements in survival rates for certain kinds of cancer in recent years.


P.O. DEPARTMENT DISCIPLINARY PAY REDUCTIONS
Mr. Orlikow: 1.	Under what authority, for what reasons and to what extent does the Post Office Department reduce the salaries of its employees as a result of disciplinary measures?
2.	Have any employees in the Post Office Department been penalized by a reduction in salary between April 1, 1962 and July 7, 1964, under the Post Office Act and, if so (a) how many (b) what was the sum total of these salary reductions?
3.	Has the department taken steps to reimburse the employees so penalized under the Post Office Act and, if not, for what reason?
4.	Has reimbursement been made in any case to date and, if so, to what extent?
5.	If any employees in the Post Office Department were penalized by a reduction in salary

under the Post Office Act between April 1, 1962 and July 7, 1964, was the civil service commission made aware of it?
6.	Did central pay office accept staff pay certificates from the Post Office Department reducing salaries of employees as a result of disciplinary measures exacted under the Post Office Act without the civil service commission being made aware of it and, if so, to what extent?
7.	Does the Post Office Department penalize an
employee by a reduction in salary as a result of disciplinary measures under section 5(1)	(e) of
the Post Office Act and, if so, how many employees have been penalized since April 1, 1962 by a salary reduction under this section, and what is the sum total of these salary reductions?
8.	Does the department regard an employee who fails examinations as inefficient, and whose service and conduct is unsatisfactory?
9.	Since April 1, 1962, are postal employees who fail departmental examinations penalized by a reduction in salary and, if so (a) to what extent (b) under what circumstances (c) by what authority (d) has the employee the right to appeal against the decision of the deputy head to the civil service commission?
10.	Have any employees in the department been penalized by a salary reduction due to examination failures under section 6(o) of the Post Office Act since April 1, 1962, and, if so (a) how many employees have been penalized because of inefficiency (b) because their services or conduct was unsatisfactory?
11.	Have employees so penalized the right to appeal and, if so, under what authority do they have this right to appeal?
12.	Are monetary penalties appealable in every case and, if not, which are not appealable?


Hon. Rene Tremblay (Postmaster General):: 1.	Under authority of section 5, subsection (1), paragraph (e) and section 6, paragraph (o) of the Post Office Act, and section 56 of the Civil Service Act, the Post Office Department may reduce the salaries of employees for misconduct or incompetence resulting in temporary reduction in salary, reduction in pay, demotion or suspension.
2.	Yes.
(a) Prior to July 1, 1962 no summaries were maintained for the information requested and to compile the information at the present time would require a review of a great number of records. Beginning July 1, 1962 this information has been compiled by six month periods. From July 1, 1962 to December 31, 1963, there were 1,235 reductions in salary of $5 or $10 for one to six months imposed under the Post Office Act. In February 1964 there was a change in the interpretation of legislation and the Post Office Department commenced imposing this type of penalty under the Civil Service Act. The statistics for the six month period January 1, 1964 to June 30, 1964 include penalties imposed under both the Post Office Act and the Civil Service Act and num-20220-723
Questions
ber 408. Separate statistics have not been maintained.
(b) Information on the sum total of salary reductions has not been maintained. Preparation of this data would require undue labour and expense.
3.	No. There are no good reasons for such reimbursement.
4.	See answer to part 3.
5.	Yes.
6.	No.
7.	See answer to part 2.
8.	Failure in an examination results in a review of the employee's total performance of his duties with a view to assisting that employee to overcome any difficulties which may prevent a satisfactory discharge of his duties. Withholding of a statutory salary increase or a reduction of one full step or more in the employee's salary range have been imposed on some employees because of employee failure to meet certain standards, but only after every opportunity has been extended to the employee to remedy his shortcomings and where continued unsatisfactory performance, unfavourably affects the postal service. On infrequent occasions, repeated failures, which clearly demonstrate an inability to properly carry out the duties, do result in dismissals.
9.	Yes.
(a)	Demotion by temporary salary reduction of one full step in the range of pay for the position, or dismissal.
(b)	After a second or a third failure demonstrating inefficiency in the performance of sortation duties, due to lack of knowledge.
(c)	Section 56 of the Civil Service Act.
(d)	Yes.
10.	No.
11.	Not applicable.
12.	Yes, monetary penalties are appealable in every case except penalties imposed under the Post Office Act for loss of keys and for cases where the employee is at the minimum rate of pay, thus precluding a salary reduction under the Civil Service Act.


VETERANS PREFERENCE, CAPE BRETON NATIONAL PARK
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
Is veterans preference being observed In the hiring of personnel at the Cape Breton highlands national park and, if so, are veterans being refused employment and non-veterans being employed?


Arthur Laing: Yes, veterans having the proper qualifications to do

Questions
the required work and a good work record in previous employment who apply to the national employment service or the park superintendent are afforded every opportunity for employment as jobs are available and where all other facts are equal a veteran would be preferred.


REPAIR OF LOCOMOTIVE CRANKCASES IN U.S.
Mr. Irvine: Have representations been made to the Department of Labour by local 27 U.A.W. London, Ontario, concerning the transshipment for repair in the U.S. of Canadian locomotive crank cases and, if so, will the government ensure that action is taken in this matter which will result in the provision of additional work for Canadians?


Mr. J. A. Byrne (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Labour):: Yes. Representations have been received and have been drawn to the attention of the Minister of Industry.


OVERHAUL OF SHIP &quot;ELMER JONES&quot;
Mr. Douglas: Has a boat called the Elmer Jones been repaired or overhauled at the C.N.R. docks in St. John's, Newfoundland, since 1958 and, if so (a) what are the dates of such repairs or overhauls (b) what was the cost of each repair or overhaul job (c) what was the date of payment (d) who authorized such repairs of overhauls (e) what was the length of time needed for any such repairs or overhauls (f) who are the owners of the Elmer Jones?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The
management of the Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
Some work was done on the Elmer Jones in each of the years 1958, 1959, and 1962. With respect to the itemized information requested the railway has consistently taken the position that it should not be required to disclose detailed information of its business dealings with private parties. This position has in the past been supported by parliament.


C.N.R. SALE OF DAMAGED GOODS, ST. JOHN'S, NEWFOUNDLAND
Mr. Douglas: 1.	What amount has been received from the sale of lost or damaged goods by the C.N.R. at St. John's, Newfoundland, for each year since 1958?
2.	By what means are such goods disposed?
3.	To whom were the sales made?
4.	What amounts have been paid by the C.N.R. in the Atlantic division to cover lost or damaged goods for each year since 1958?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The
management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
[Mr. Laing.)
1.	Amounts received from sales at St. John's
Newfoundland, of damaged or unclaimed goods:	1958, $56,892; 1959, $85,957; 1960,
$66,468; 1961, $89,927; 1962, $112,331; 1963, $117,334; 1964 to November, $126,825.
2.	These goods are sold to the best advantage of the railway, generally through a jobber, or, in the case of food stuffs, to large institutions.
3.	Most of these goods have been purchased by Mr. P. Gosse, a salvage dealer, of Torbay.
4.	Amounts paid by the railway in settlement for lost or damaged goods on the Atlantic region: 1958, $947,891; 1959, $1,096,142; 1960, $1,043,271; 1961, $1,131,680; 1962, $1,283,266;	1963, $1,389,341;	1964 to November,


$1,059,571. C.N.R. BUILDING RENTALS, MONCTON, N.B.
Mr. Douglas: Did the C.N.R. pay rent for any buildings in Moncton since 1955 and, if so (a) from whom did the C.N.R. rent such buildings (b) what were the terms of such leases (c) how much was paid in rent each year for each building?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The
management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows: answered by the return tabled this day to parts 2 and 3 of question No. 2,543.


&quot;OOKPIK&quot;
Mr. Rheaume: 1.	Has the government appointed a director of special merchandising for the Fort Chimo Eskimo co-operative with responsibility for Ookpik and, if so, when and at what salary?
2.	Is Ookpik being used internationally as a Canadian emblem?


Arthur Laing: 1. While the government is advising and assisting the Fort Chimo co-operative in management of Ookpik, no such appointment has been made by the government.
Several months ago, the Fort Chimo cooperative association recognized the need for a representative in southern Canada to look after the co-operative's commercial interests in Ookpik. The co-operative appointed as its agent Mr. R. S. Staples, president of the co-operative union of Canada. As the volume of work increased, the co-operative decided to hire a full time director of marketing and sales. This person was hired and is paid by the co-operative and works under the immediate supervision of Mr. Staples. He is not connected with any agency or department of government.

2.	The major international use of Ookpik to date was at the Canadian trade fair in Philadelphia, U.S.A., in November, 1963. Ookpik was used at that fair as a trade promotion symbol by the Department of Trade and Commerce. Since that time Ookpik has been used on several occasions at trade fairs as a trade promotion symbol but to a lesser degree than at Philadelphia.


STORM LOSSES BY LOBSTER FISHERMEN. ATLANTIC PROVINCES
Mr. Coates: 1.	What action is the Minister of Fisheries taking to assist the lobster fishermen in the Atlantic provinces who have suffered substantial trap losses in recent storms in that area?
2.	What is the estimated trap loss?
3.	Is it the intention of the government to go beyond the assistance presently available to lobster fishermen through their insurance fund?


Hon. H. J. Robichaud (Minister of Fisheries):: 1. Relief in such situations is primarily a provincial responsibility. Provision is available under the fishing vessel indemnity plan for insuring of lobster traps. Very few traps were insured, although fishermen were notified before the season opened of the benefits of the plan.
2.	62,000.
3.	No request for assistance beyond that provided by the fishing vessel indemnity plan has been received.


BANK OF CANADA LOANS TO FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS
Mr. Paul: 1.	With reference to the answer to question No. 2,236 on November 25, 1964, what were the considerations obtained when the Bank of Canada was empowered to make loans to the government of Canada of up to one third of the government's estimated revenues for a fiscal year while at the same time limiting the granting of loans to provincial governments to only one quarter of their estimated revenues for the fiscal year?
2.	Do loans granted to the government of Canada also have to be repaid before the end of the first quarter following the expiry of that government's fiscal year?
3.	Since the establishment of the Bank of Canada, how many loans or advances have been made to the government of Canada and the provincial governments in what years, for what amounts and at what rates?
4.	Before the establishment of the Bank of Canada, did the provincial governments obtain loans or advances from the government of Canada or from other sources?
5.	Are there any reasons for which the Bank of Canada, since 1936, has not granted any advance or loan to any provincial government and, if so, what are the reasons?
6.	Has the Bank of Canada, since 1936, received any applications for advances from any provincial
20220-723i
Questions
governments, from which provincial governments, and for what amounts?


Lawrence T. Pennell: 1. Reference to the debates of the House of Commons in 1934 when the Bank of Canada Act of 1934 was passed indicate that the terms of section 21(l)(k) of that act, which empowered the bank to make loans to the government of Canada of up to one third of the government's estimated revenues for a fiscal year and to provincial governments up to one quarter of their estimated revenues for the fiscal year, arose out of suggestions made by the royal commission on banking and currency in Canada, 1933, in the appendix to its report.
2.	Yes, under the provisions of the Bank of Canada Act.
3.	The published statements of the Bank of Canada show the following advances outstanding to the government of Canada and, where noted in parentheses, to provincial governments, on the balance sheet dates indicated:
1935: April 30, $3,000,000; May 1, $3,000,000; June 19, $2,717,562.50; June 26, $3,706,562.50; June 29, $4,201,562.50; July 3, $4,216,000; July 10, $4,222,375; July 17, $4,224,500; July 24,	$3,227,250; July 31,	$1,240,625;
August 7, $6,241,250; August 14, $9,247,500; August 21, $1,248,125; August 28, $1,246,875; August 31, $1,246,562.50; September 4, $1,242,812.50; September 11, $1,237,500; September 18, $1,241,250; September 25, $2,764,375; September 30, $2,759,375; October 2, $3,472,125; October 9,	$3,468,625; October 16,
$2,233,000; October 23, $12,231,625; October 30, $15,725,437.50; October 31, $15,724,750; November 6, $24,224,062.50; November 13, $29,224,750; November 20,	$2,222,687.50;
November 27,	$2,222,000; November 30,
$2,223,375; December 4, $2,224,062.50; December 11, $2,223,375; December 18, $2,219,937.50; December 24, $2,220,625; December 31, $3,465,812.50;
1936: January 8, $2,205,500; January 15, $2,200,687.50; January 22, $2,200,000; January 29, $2,197,250; January 31, $2,195,875; each statement date between April 30 and May 27, $2,000,000 (provincial governments); between May 30 and October 28, $3,000,000 (provincial governments); between October 31 and November 25, $1,000,000 (provincial governments);
1938: January 12, $5,000,000; April 20, $4,000,000; April 27, $7,000,000; April 30, $7,000,000;
September 25, 1940, $25,000,000; September 30, 1940, $32,000,000; November 7, 1951,

Questions
$10,000,000; November 5, 1952, $75,000,000; November 12, 1952, $10,000,000; November 19, 1952, $10,000,000; January 7, 1953, $60,000,000; October 31, 1961, $6,000,000; November 1, 1961, $45,000,000.
Interest rates charged by the bank on loans or advances are not a matter of public record. However, section 18(3) of the Bank of Canada Act requires that the bank shall at all times make public the minimum rate at which it is prepared to make loans or advances, and this published minimum rate has been as follows:
From March 11, 1935, to February 7, 1944, 21 per cent; from February 8, 1944, to October 16, 1950, 1J per cent; from October 17, 1950, to February 14, 1955, 2 per cent; from February 15, 1955, to August 5, 1955, li per cent; from August 6, 1955, to October 12,
1955,	2 per cent; from October 13, 1955, to November 18, 1955, 2\ per cent; from November 19, 1955, to April 4, 1956, 2J per cent; from April 5, 1956, to August 9, 1956, 3 per cent; from August 10, 1956, to October 17,
1956,	3i per cent; from October 18, 1956, to November 1, 1956, 3J per cent; from November 2, 1956, to June 24, 1962, \ per cent above the latest average tender rate for three month government of Canada treasury bills; from June 25, 1962, to September 7,
1962,	6 per cent; from September 8, 1962, to October 12, 1962, 5 J per cent; from October 13, 1962, to November 13, 1962, 5 per cent; from November 14, 1962, to May 6, 1963, 4 per cent; from May 7, 1963, to August 11,
1963,	3J per cent; from August 12, 1963, to November 23, 1964, 4 per cent; from November 24, 1964, 4\ per cent.
4.	Yes, for such purposes as facilitating provincial financing, loans to farmers, housing loans and relief programs.
5.	Answered by 6.
6.	No.


INCIDENCE OF MONGOLISM DUE TO FLUORIDATION
Mr. Marcoux: 1.	Has the Department of National Health and Welfare been informed of the work of Dr. I. Rapaport on the increased incidence of Mongolian idiocy among children born in areas with fluoridated water?
2.	Has the same department been informed of Dr. I. Rapaport's recently published data relative to the mechanism by which fluoride could increase the incidence of Mongolism?
3.	Is the said department still of the opinion that no ill effect has ever been encountered after the use of "normally" fluoridated water?


Mr. J. C. Munro (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Health and Welfare):: The Department of National Health and Welfare has reviewed Dr. Rapaport's data relating to fluoridation in Wisconsin and its possible relationship to mongolism and has also consulted the United States public health service concerning this matter. On the basis of its findings this department regards Dr. Rapaport's data as unconvincing. At the present time the department is not aware of authentic evidence indicating that any ill effects have ever been encountered in North America by consumption of water fluoridated at one part per million. On the contrary, there are many reports in the scientific literature attesting to the safety and value of fluoridation as a public health measure.


POINT CLARK LIGHT HISTORIC SITE
Mr. Loney: Did the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources arrive at a decision regarding the acquisition of the Point Clark light site for a national historic site when the historic sites and monuments board met in October?


Arthur Laing: The historic sites and monuments board of Canada have not made any recommendations with respect to the Point Clark light site.


TENDERS FOR BAG CONVEYOR, TORONTO POST OFFICE
Mr. Loney: 1.	How many tenders were received by the Department of Public Works for empty bag handling conveyor, postal terminal "A", Toronto, Ontario?
2.	Who were the tenderers and what were the respective amounts thereof?
3.	Which of the tenders was accepted?
4.	Were tenders limited to designated Arms or companies and, if so, who were they?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: 1. Three.
2.	Rapistan Canada Ltd., Rexdale, Ont., $5,758.95; Mathews Conveyer Co. Ltd., Port Hope, Ont., $7,290; Curvo Conveyor & Equipment Co. Ltd., Clarkson, Ont., $13,766.
3.	The tender of Rapistan Canada Ltd. has been accepted.
4.	No. Tenders were advertised in the following newspapers: the Daily Star, Toronto; the Telegram, Toronto; the Globe and Mail, Toronto.


NATIONAL WELFARE COUNCIL
Mr. Enns: 1.	What are the reasons for the delay in implementing legislation passed during 1962, providing for the establishment of a national welfare council?

2.	Did the Minister oi National Health and Welfare indicate on September 11, 1964, that appointments to this council would be made this autumn and, if so, when will such appointments to the council be completed and on what date will the council become operative?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: 1 and 2. Appointments were made to the national council of welfare on December 23, 1964. The council will have its first meeting within the next two months.


REPORT OF BICULTURALISM COMMISSION
Mr. Mandziuk: Will the interim report of the commission on bilingualism and biculturalism to the government, be made public and, if so, will copies be made available to all members of parliament?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Yes.


SICK MARINERS MEDICAL SERVICE
Mr. Mather: 1.	Is there a federal health service known as the sick mariners medical services?
2.	Is this service operating in the Vancouver, B.C. area?
3.	What is the number of sick mariners in that area suffering from venereal disease?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: 1. The medical services directorate of the Department of National Health and Welfare operates a service known as the sick mariners service.
2.	Yes.
3.	There is no specific information available. There is no legislation which compels sick mariners to seek treatment from the Department of National Health and Welfare. With the exception of foreign seamen signing off, no routine examinations are carried out on ships' crews to determine the prevalence of venereal disease.


APPROVAL OF RIMOUSKI FERRY PROJECT
Mr. Fisher: 1.	In the matter of the Rimouski ferry project in which the Department of Transport has an interest and a responsibility, did the last minister of transport under the Diefenbaker government give any indications by letter or telegram or by public announcement that the department approved or hoped to approve this project?
2.	If so, what were the dates of such messages and what was the gist of them?


Jean-Charles Cantin: 1 and 2.
It is assumed that this question refers to the operation carried out between Baie Comeau and Pointe au Pere by La Compagnie de Navigation Nord-Sud Limitee of Rimouski.
Questions
The department has no record of public announcement by the minister who is referred to in question, other than the statement made in Hansard on Friday, September 8, 1961 (page 8107); or of letters or telegrams from that minister dealing with this matter other than letter dated February 12, 1963, from that minister to the president of the company, informing him that it has not been possible as yet to reach a decision regarding additional harbour works in this connection at the ferry terminals, but expressing the hope that it might be possible to reach such a decision shortly.


SHELL OIL COMPANY-PURCHASE OF SUPPLIES BY AGENTS
Mr. Martin (Timmins): Is the government aware of any cases where Shell Oil Company are compelling their agents to buy all supplies from United Supply and, if so, has this matter been investigated with a view to combines investigation legislation?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: In 1962 the restrictive trade practices commission submitted a report on an inquiry into the distribution and sale of automotive oils, greases, anti-freeze, additives, tires, batteries, accessories, and related products in which it extensively examined the agreements and policies whereby retail gasoline outlets or service stations are restricted or influenced by their gasoline suppliers as to the brands, types and sources of supply of the foregoing products handled by such outlets and made recommendations for amendments to the Combines Investigation Act. There was no reference in this report to the relationship between Shell Canada Limited and United Supply and no such information has subsequently been received by the director. Following extensive study of the report and recommendations contained therein, the Minister of Justice, in reply to questions in the house on October 29 and November 26, 1964, stated that he had placed certain recommendations before the cabinet and expected to be in a position in the near future to make known the policy of the government with respect to the foregoing recommendations.


JACQUES HEBERT-CONTINUATION AS C.B.C. COMMENTATOR
Mr. Marcoux: As a result of the Brossard commission report on the Coffin case and the comments concerning Jacques Hebert, is the C.B.C. considering the removal of Mr. Hebert from his regular job as a commentator and, if not, for what reason?

Questions


Maurice Lamontagne: The C.B.C. advises me that the answer to the first question is no.
Here is the answer to the second question:
Mr. Hebert is not on the staff of the C.B.C. As a free lance, he works under contract as commentator on the television program "Interet et principal".
The corporation does not wish under the present circumstances to terminate his contract.
ITexft


DAMAGE TO SEED CORN CROP
Mr. Danforlh: 1.	What percentage of the 1964 Canadian seed com crop was damaged or destroyed for seed corn purposes by the early frost?
2.	What extra precautions are the government taking to ensure that Canadian corn growers are provided with top quality seed in every respect for year 1965?
3.	Is the government enforcing the cold test on germinating tests of samples of seed corn in order to ensure the availability of seed providing a high percentage of germination for early planting?
4.	Will the government enforce a regulation requiring the tags on seed corn containers to plainly indicate the year in which the seed corn was produced?


Harry William Hays: 1. Frost damage was limited to late-maturing varieties which represent 25 per cent of the seed acreage. The extent of its effect on germination cannot be determined until all lots have been tested.
2.	Work is being conducted in the research laboratory to determine the effect of the frost damage. Late maturing varieties, which were the ones affected in Canada, are expected to be available in the United States to supplement the Canadian supply.
3.	Canada uses the germination test methods of the association of official seed analysts. The cold test method is not an official method under the rules for seed testing. The official method used by Canada continues to be enforced to ensure that seed meets the germination standards set out in the seeds regulations.
4.	The Seeds Act, which provides for the control of seed sales, does not require that labels show the year of production.
The act does require that seed be labelled as to grade, and the month and year of the germination test. There are minimum germination standards for each grade.
These regulations will continue to be enforced.
[Mr. Marcoux.l


CONTINENTAL POWER GRID
Mr. Gelber: In conjunction with phase two of a national power network study which the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources has announced, is consideration being given to the planning of a continental power grid?


Arthur Laing: The primary objective of the studies now under way is to investigate the possibility of development of a national power network. The possible effect of international interconnections will be taken into consideration in the course of this investigation.


MOUNT STEWART, P.E.I., POST OFFICE
Mr. Macquarrie: 1.	On what date was the erection of a post office at Mount Stewart, P.E.I. announced?
2.	By whom was the announcement made and in what media?
3.	What was the original intended date for commencing construction?
4.	What is the revised date of construction?
5.	Has land been purchased and, if so, from whom and at what price?
6.	What is the area of the land and the dimensions of the building?
7.	Was the site recommended by the village commissioners of Mount Stewart?
8.	With what members of the commission were discussions on the subject held?
Hor.. Lucien Cardin (Minister of Public Works): 1. November 25, 1964.
2.	By the Department of Public Works through the local press, the Charlottetown Guardian and the Charlottetown Patriot.
3.	No date had been set for commencement of construction.
4.	The contract was awarded on December 15, 1964, and work is now well underway.
5.	Yes, from Mr. Harold Affleck for $2,000.
6.	The land, 80 feet by 132 feet; the building 24x24 feet.
7.	The village commissioners approved the site.
8.	These discussions were held between the local postal area superintendent and village commissioners, chairman Walter MacDonald and commissioner Roy Innis.


PAYMENT OF INCOME TAX ASSESSORS
Mr. Olson: Are any income tax assessors paid on a commission basis, with particular reference to those assessors who review and reassess income tax returns?


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of National Revenue):: No.


PREMISES OCCUPIED BY ARMED FORCES, EDMONTON
Mr. Lambert: 1.	What is the description and extent of premises occupied by units of the armed services of Canada on the east side of 109th street between 99th and 100th avenue in the city of Edmonton?
2.	Are any or all of these premises owned by the crown of Canada or are they occupied under lease?
3.	If under lease, who is the lessor, and what are the terms of the lease or leases as to time and the rental?
4.	Has any decision been taken as to future occupancy and use of these premises by units of the armed services of Canada?


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of National Defence):: 1. Lots 27, 28 and 29 in block 8, S/D plan 'B', HBR. The dimension of these lots is 50'xl40', and there is a building of masonry construction, (20, 944 sq. ft.) located on these lots.
2.	They are owned by the crown.
3.	Not applicable.
4.	This property will be declared surplus to requirements as soon as the present occupants can be suitably relocated.


USE OF LAND BY DEFENCE DEPARTMENT, EDMONTON
Mr. Lambert: 1.	What is the nature of the occupancy by the Department of National Defence of a lot of land on the west side of 108th street between 99th and 100th avenues in the city of Edmonton (a) by ownership (b) by lease?
2.	If by lease, who is the lessor and under what terms?
3.	If by ownership, when was it purchased, from whom and for what price?
4.	Has any decision been taken as to its future use by units of the armed services of Canada or by any other government department or agency?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: 1. Lot 61, Block 8, S/D Plan 'B' HBR, is crown owned.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	This lot was purchased on 12 January, 1955 from Ross Motors (Edmonton Ltd.), together with three lots and a building located thereon fronting on 109th street, Edmonton. The total purchase price for these properties was $254,000.
4.	This property will be declared surplus concurrently with lots 27, 28 and 29 in same block.


TENDERS FOR HAULING HAY, ELK ISLAND PARK
Mr. Lambert: 1.	What were the names of the tenderers for a contract or contracts to haul hay from Elk Island
Questions
national park to Jasper national park and/or Banff national park in 1964 and the amounts of such tenders?
2.	What is the name of (a) the lowest tenderer
(b)	the tenderer who was awarded the contract?


Arthur Laing: 1. Elk Island national park to Jasper national park: Bell Bros. Transport Ltd., $4,750; Loewen's Transport, $4,186; Edmonton Transfer Ltd., $3,725; Mr. E. A. Marsh, $3,562.50; Al's Trucking, $3,000.
Elk Island national park to Banff national park: Bell Bros. Transport Ltd., $4,353; Neil Ross, $3,690; Crone Bros. Ltd., $3,595; Edmonton Transfer Ltd., $3,437.50; Loewen's Transport, $2,845.20.
2. (a) and (b): Jasper, Al's Trucking; Banff, Loewen's Transport.


COMPULSORY RETIREMENT OF REACTIVATED ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL
Mr. Lambert: 1.	Were any members of the armed services who temporarily retired or voluntarily resigned from the armed services to take civilian appointments in the public service of Canada, since April 21, 1963 restored to the active list and then compulsorily retired since April 1, 1964, under the integration program and, if so, how many and under what conditions?
2.	Did any such personnel receive any compulsory retirement allowances?


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


ROYAL CANADIAN NAVY PERSONNEL
Mr. Crouse: 1.	How many men have joined the R.C.N. each month since January, 1963?
2.	How many men have left the R.C.N. each month since January, 1963?
3.	Of those leaving the service, how many left after (a) 5 years (b) 10 years (c) 15 years, and (d) 20 years?
4.	Of those who left in each month since January, 1963, how many were in Trade Group 1, 2, 3 and 4?
5.	Of those in trade groups 2, 3 and 4 how many (a) were engine room ratings (b) electrical radar
(c)	ordnance or other technical ratings?
6.	How many men have re-engaged each month since January, 1963?
7.	Is immediate action being taken to provide adequate housing for naval personnel at Halifax and Dartmouth, and if so, in detail what are the plans in this regard?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: 1.

			Questions	
			1963	1964
Jan.	317	126)Feb.	272	132 LMar.	369	132 (Apr.	254	126,)May	209	239June	165	132July	342	204Aug.	346	172Sept.	190	225Oct.	320	259Nov.	203	124Dec.	36	1692.	Jan.	339	337Feb.	292	306Mar.	305	346Apr.	282	256May.	210	242June	293	288July	280	216Aug.	260	220Sept.	238	330Oct.	219	266Nov.	299	302Dec.	170	1933.	(a) 634; (b) 169; (c) 126;	(d) 130.4.	1963	19644	3	2 1	4 3 2Jan.	9	16	44 212	12 13 56Feb.	5	10	27 212	11 5 68Mar.	12	3	24 204	6 12 65Apr.	20	6	40 168	18 11 39May	7	12	31 107	7 14 28June	15	9	50 156	15 11 46July	17	9	34 170	16 11 29Aug.	12	6	37 145	19 12 35Sept.	9	8	37 143	19 13 28Oct.	15	11	27 114	11 17 28Nov.	12	8	58 178	17 13 28Dec.	12	10	36 87	8 17 205.	(a) 365;	(b)	189; (c) 172.	6.	1963	1964Jan.	258	300Feb.	188	319Mar.	211	277Apr.	182	247May	174	216June	198	194July	206	134Aug.	156	184Sept.	161	218Oct.	171	205Nov.	246	207Dec.	145	118

7.	Under an arrangement between the Department of National Defence and Dartmouth Investment Limited, 397 rental housing units have recently been completed for married service personnel. Naval housing requirements in the Halifax-Dartmouth area are being surveyed by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the flag officer Atlantic coast. Further action will be determined in the light of this survey.
*A recruiting quota was imposed for the four months January-April 1964 and the intake represents the full requirement for this period.


TENDERS FOR REWIRING, CAMP PETAWAWA
Mr. Loney: 1.	What are the names and addresses of the tenderers, tender for rewiring various buildings, Camp Petawawa, Ontario-File: 535-P2-18?
2.	What was the price quoted by each tenderer?
3.	Was the lowest tender accepted and, if not, for what reason?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: In so far as Defence Construction (1951) Limited is concerned, the answer is as follows:
1 and 2. Boldt Electric Co. Ltd., Renfrew, Ontario, $21,249; Rondeau Electric Ltd., Pembroke, Ontario, $22,450; R. E. Ferguson Ltd., Ottawa, Ontario, $24,631; Bedard Girard Limited, Ottawa, Ontario, $25,603; Industrial Electric Contractors Limited, Toronto, Ontario, $26,975; Champagne Electric Ltd., Ottawa, Ontario, $28,715.
3.	Yes.


TENDERS FOR FLOOR REFINISHING, TRENTON R.C.A.F. STATION
Mr. Loney: 1.	What are the names and addresses of the tenderers, tender for replacement and refinishing of floors, building 38, R.C.A.F. Station, Trenton, Ontario-File: 737-T2-15?
2.	What was the price quoted by each tenderer?
3.	Was the lowest tender accepted and, if not, for what reason?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: In so far as Defence Construction (1951) Limited is concerned, the answer is as follows:
1.	Miron-Wiggers Construction Ltd., Trenton, Ontario; Malach Roofing & Flooring Limited, Windsor, Ontario.
2.	Miron-Wiggers Construction Ltd., $15,985; Malach Roofing & Flooring Limited, $16,092.
3.	Yes.
193
183
108
113
181
167


BREAKWATER EXTENSION, LITTLE RIVER, N.S.
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
Is it the intention of the Department of Public Works to extend the breakwater to the shore at Little River, Victoria county, Nova Scotia?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Yes.


ENGINE HOUSE REPAIR, WRECK COVE, N.S.
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton: North and Victoria):
What are the plans of the government to improve facilities and repair the haul out engine house at Wreck Cove, MacDiarmids, Victoria county, N.S., in detail?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Consideration is being given to the removal of excess boulders, gravel and debris from the haul up area, to the replacement of the drainage culvert on the approach, and to the construction of a road approach with gravel.


WORLD POPULATION CONFERENCE
Mr. Prittie: 1.	Has the government of Canada been invited to participate in the world population conference, which will be held under the auspices of the United Nations with the co-operation of the international union for the scientific study of population, the international labour organization, the food and agricultural organization of the United Nations, the United Nations educational, scientific and cultural organization, the world health organization, and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, to take place in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, from August 30 to September 10, 1965?
2.	Has the government of Canada been requested to make a contribution towards the costs of this conference and, if so, what reply has been made to such request?


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secrelary of Stale for External Affairs: 1. Yes.
2. The United Nations has agreed to finance basic expenses other than travel costs. The Canadian government received a request in June, 1964 from the international union for the scientific study of population, a nongovernmental organization working closely with the United Nations on arrangements for the conference, to make a voluntary contribution to assist in bringing to Belgrade participants in the conference other than those sent by governments. The international union was informed that the government is unable, in view of its other commitments at this time, to contribute to the proposed fund.
Questions


TENDERS FOR POST OFFICE, DRESDEN, ONT.
Mr. Loney: 1.	What are the names and addresses of the tenderers, tender for post office S.P. 20, Dresden, Ontario?
2.	What was the price quoted by each tenderer?
3.	Was the lowest tender accepted and, if not, for what reason?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: 1 and 2. Ben Bruinsma & Sons Ltd., Chatham, Ont., $50,795; Bert Wesley Limited, Port Lambton, Ont., $55,987; George Shabsove Construction, Petrolia, Ont., $60,170.
3. Yes.


TENDERS FOR POST OFFICE IMPROVEMENTS, CENTRE BLOCK, OTTAWA
Mr. Loney: 1.	What are the names and addresses of the tenderers, tender for new counter and lighting for the post office, centre block, parliament building, Ottawa, Ontario?
2.	What was the price quoted by each tenderer?
3.	Was the lowest tender accepted and, if not, for what reason?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: 1, and 2. Coady Construction Limited, Ottawa, $5,281; A Lanctot Construction Co., Ottawa, $5,478; Normand-Farquharson, Ottawa, $6,324; J. R. Statham Construction Ltd., Ottawa, $6,490; Deljac Construction Company Ltd., Ottawa, $7,500; Beaudoin Construction Ltd., Ottawa, $7,743; George A. Cooper Construction Ltd., Ottawa, $9,167.
3. Yes.


NATIONAL GALLERY PAINTINGS
Mr. Gelber: 1.	How many paintings has the national gallery in its Canadian collection which are not presently on exhibition?
2.	How many paintings from its Canadian collection has the national gallery presently on loan to Canadian missions in other countries?


Maurice Lamontagne: 1. 785.
2. None.


PURCHASE OF FURNITURE, FORT CHURCHILL, MANITOBA
Mr. Winkler: 1.	Was furniture purchased by the Department of Public Works during 1964 to furnish certain apartments at Fort Churchill, Manitoba?
2.	What was the approximate amount of money spent on such furniture?
3.	Were tenders called for this furniture?
4.	From what company or companies, or from whom was this furniture purchased?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: 1. Yes.
2. $394,194.23.

Questions
3.	Yes.
4.	Vilas Industries Limited, Hudson's Bay Company, Simmons Limited, Blackwood Morton & Sons, Oneida Limited Silversmiths, Dura Undercushions Limited, Canadian General Electric Co. Ltd., Cooey Metal Products Limited, Hallicrafters Canada Limited, Dupuis Freres, A. Belanger Ltee.


ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF COASTGUARD SHIPS
Mr. Crouse: 1.	Has the Department of Transport administrative control over the coastguard ships, Rally, Rapid and Relay?
2.	If so, what was the position of these ships at sea or in what port were they anchored on December 1, 1964?
3.	Was a directive issued to any of these ships by the proper government authority, to go to the rescue of the lobster boats Jenny and Judy near Cape Sable island, Nova Scotia?
4.	What efforts were made by the Canadian coastguard on December 1, 1964 to rescue Stillman Quinlam and James Smith when their engine failed in the boat Jenny and Judy and they were unable to return to port?
5.	Has the government given any consideration to constructing adequate ships for service in the Canadian coastguard capable of carrying out rescue operations in times of disaster?
6.	Will the government give consideration to amending the coastguard regulations so that captains of coastguard ships may be permitted to tow any disabled shipping to the nearest port?
7.	How many letters of complaint relative to the inefficiency of the existing Canadian coastguard have been received by the Department of Transport during 1964?


Jean-Charles Cantin: 1. Yes.
2.	Rapid in Dartmouth having main engines repaired. Rally in Dartmouth having defective electronic equipment repaired. Relay had just returned to Saint John from patrol and was standing by for incidents in bay of Fundy area.
3.	No. Rapid and Rally were unserviceable. Relay was allocated to bay of Fundy operations as a vessel of her size could have achieved little in the exceptionally severe conditions that she would have encountered outside the bay.
4.	The nearest ships to the scene were the naval escorts Terra Nova and Gatineau. These were diverted to go and help but could not reach the area in time because of the very severe weather.
5.	All Canadian coastguard ships are capable of carrying out rescue operations in areas and weather conditions appropriate to their size. Much useful rescue work is continually being done. A number of coastguard ships are now being equipped with stabilizing devices

which will improve their capability for rescue in heavy weather. Design studies for other types are also underway.
6.	Coastguard ships can and do tow disabled craft when they are in genuine distress and when this is the best way of dealing with the emergency. The government does not have enough ships to provide a free towing service to every vessel which is broken down and is not in any danger or distress. In these circumstances, it is the normal seafaring practice for vessels to make their own arrangements with another craft or through commercial towing companies.
7.	No letters specifically complaining of coastguard inefficiency have been received in the minister's office, or by departmental officials during 1964.


CIVIL SERVICE SUPERANNUATION FUND
Mr. MacRae: 1.	What is the present balance as of November 30, 1964, in the federal civil service superannuation fund?
2.	What has been the annual increase in this fund for each of the past five years?


Lawrence T. Pennell: 1. $2,116,136,885.41.
2. Fiscal year ending March 31: 1960, $93,598,459; 1961, $239,227,786; 1962, $118,081,290; 1963, $137,186,706; 1964, $132,291,518.


RETIRED R.C.M.P. PERSONNEL JOINING QUEBEC PROVINCIAL POLICE
Mr. Coates: How many members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police have retired in the last year from that force and joined the Quebec provincial police?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Of those members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who retired during the last year, 13 subsequently joined the Quebec provincial police.


COMPLAINTS RESPECTING FENCE AT LOCKS, ST. ANDREWS, MAN.
Mr. Slogan: 1.	What complaints regarding the erection of a fence that will prevent fishing from the wall at the approach to the locks at St. Andrews, Manitoba, has the Minister of Public Works received?
2.	What action and what decision has the minister made and, if no decision has been made, when will a decision be forthcoming?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: 1. A complaint against the erection of a fence to exclude the public from the mooring wall at the approach to the St.

Andrews navigation locks at Lockport, Manitoba, was received in a letter dated October 14, 1964, from Dr. Joseph Slogan, M.P., on behalf of Mr. Gordon E. Skinner of Lock-port, Manitoba.
2. Departmental officials have been authorized to erect the fence in 1965 prior to the opening of the navigation season.


TENDERS FOR PAINTING, CAMP GAGETOWN, N.B.
Mr. MacRae: 1.	How many tenders were received on November 12, 1964, at 3 p.m. for painting, Camp Gagetown, New Brunswick?
2.	Who were the tenderers and what were the respective amounts thereof?
3.	Which of the tenderers were accepted?
4.	Were tenders limited to designated firms or companies and, if so, who were they?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: In so far as Defence Construction (1951) Limited is concerned, the answer is as follows:
1.	Four.
2.	S. R. Shears & Sons Ltd., Fredericton, N.B., $68,800; Planned Renovators Limited, Montreal, Quebec, $69,000; Byron MacDonald painting contractor, Chatham, N.B., $79,250; A. N. Clarke & Son Limited, Moncton, N.B., $88,160.
3.	S. R. Shears & Sons Ltd., the lowest tenderer.
4.	No. Publicly advertised tender call.


ESSO SERVICE STATION, CAMP BORDEN
Mr. Smith: 1.	Is the Department of National Defence the owner of the land upon which an Imperial Esso service station and garage is operated at Camp Borden?
2.	Is the Department of National Defence the owner of the lands upon which the said buildings are erected and, if so, is ground rent paid to the department and in what amount?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: 1. Yes.
2. This service station was constructed by Imperial Oil on crown land and is operated by Maple Leaf Services under licence by the department. No ground rent is paid to the Department of National Defence.


FINA SERVICE STATION, CAMP BORDEN
Mr. Smith: 1.	Is the Department of National Defence the owner of the land upon which a Canadian Petro-fina service station and garage is operated at Camp Borden?
2.	Is the Department of National Defence the owner of the lands upon which the said buildings are erected and, if so, is ground rent paid to the department and in what amount?
Questions


Paul Theodore Hellyer: 1. Yes.
2. This service station was constructed by Canadian Petrofina Limited on crown land and is operated by the commanding officer in his capacity of administrator of non-public funds, and the oil company. No ground rent is paid to the Department of National Defence.


CRIMINAL CHARGE AGAINST BUDDY LEEDS, BRANDON, MAN.
Mr. Macaluso: 1.	Was one Buddy Leeds of Brandon, Manitoba, arrested in late July or early August 1960, and charged with a criminal offense and, if so, what was the nature of the offense for which he was charged?
2.	What was the outcome of the prosecution?
Answer: 1. Buddy Leeds of Brandon, Manitoba, was arrested on July 29, 1960, on three charges of forgery.
2. The charges were withdrawn on July 3, 1961.


CANADIAN OBSERVERS AT MEETINGS OF SOUTH AMERICAN COUNTRIES
Mr. Nesbill: 1.	How many Canadian observers attended last week's meeting of Latin-American legislators in Lima, Peru, who were they, and in what fields do they specialize?
2.	To this point during the twenty sixth parliament, how many Canadian observers have been sent to meetings of south and/or central American nations?
3.	What meetings were attended?
4.	How many attended each, and who were they?


Paul Joseph James Martin: 1. None.
2.	As far as records indicate, 19.
3.	(i) Inter-American conference of ministers of labour on the alliance for progress at Bogota in May, 1963.
(ii)	14th meeting of directing council of the pan-American health organization at Washington in September, 1963.
(iii)	11th pan-American congress of railways at Mexico city in October, 1963.
(iv)	2nd annual meeting of inter-American economic and social council at Sao Paulo in November, 1963.
(v)	3rd pan-American inter-parliamentary conference at Washington in February, 1964.
(vi)	2nd inter-American meeting of government experts on civil aviation at Santiago, Chile in July, 1964.
(vii)	15th meeting of the directing council of the pan-American health organization at Mexico city in August and September, 1964.

Questions
(viii)	5th inter-American Indian conference at Quito in October, 1964.
(ix)	3rd annual meeting of inter-American economic and social council at Lima in November and December, 1964.
4.	(i) 2, Mr. H. E. Gray, M.P. and Mr. P. H. Casselman.
(ii)	2, Dr. Stanley Haidasz, M.P. and Dr. B. D. B. Layton.
(iii)	2, Mr. Rod Kerr and Mr. F. B. Clark.
(iv)	3, Mr. G. B. Summers, Mr. J. R. Midwinter and Mr. D. M. Holton.
(v)	1, Senator J. M. Dessureault.
(vi)	2, Mr. J. R. Belcher and Mr. F. N. Woodward.
(vii)	1, Dr. B. D. B. Layton.
(viii)	2, Mr. J. H. Lagasse and Mr. R. F. Battle.
(ix)	4, Mr. F. M. Tovell, Mr. R. E. Gravel, Mr. K. G. Ramsay and Mr. D. J. McEachran.


HISTORIC SITE, FORT POINT, N.S.
Mr. Crouse: 1.	What action is being taken by the Minister of Transport, in response to the representations made by interested parties in Nova Scotia, to preserve the government owned property at Fort Point, Lunenburg county, Nova Scotia, as a national historic site, marking the early capital of French Acadia?
2.	Will the government give consideration to the restoration of the early fort including, if necessary, the acquisition of additional land on which ruins may be found of the fort established in 1632 by Isaac DeRazilly while serving as Lieutenant General of the French colony of Acadia?


Maurice Lamontagne: I am informed by the departments of transport and northern affairs and national resources as follows:
1.	A further investigation of the lighthouse site at Fort Point, Lunenburg county, Nova Scotia, will be made in the spring before a final decision is taken. Adequate safeguards will also be taken to ensure that the public has access to the historic monument located on this property.
2.	Since this matter requires an extensive study to obtain the necessary information before any decision can be made, it is intended to place this subject before the historic sites and monuments board of Canada.


NURSES, NURSING ASSISTANTS AND ORDERLIES, SHAUGHNESSY HOSPITAL
Mr. Douglas: 1.	How many ward nurses were on staff at Shaughnessy hospital at January 1, 1964 and at November 30, 1964?
2.	How many ward nurses were hired at Shaughnessy hospital between January 1, 1964 and November 30, 1964?

3.	How many ward nurses left their employment at Shaughnessy hospital between January 1, 1964 and November 30, 1964?
4.	What are the present rates of pay for ward nurses at Shaughnessy hospital?
5.	How many nursing assistants were on staff at Shaughnessy hospital at January 1, 1964 and at November 30, 1964?
6.	How many nursing assistants were hired at Shaughnessy hospital between January 1, 1964 and November 30, 1964?
7.	How many nursing assistants left their employment at Shaughnessy hospital between January 1, 1964 and November 30, 1964?
8.	What are the present rates of pay for nursing assistants at Shaughnessy hospital?
9.	How many orderlies were on staff at Shaughnessy hospital at January 1, 1964 and at November 30, 1964?
10.	How many orderlies were hired at Shaughnessy hospital between January 1,	1964 and
November 30, 1964?
11.	How many orderlies left their employment at Shaughnessy hospital between January 1, 1964 and November 30, 1964?
12.	What are the present rates of pay for orderlies at Shaughnessy hospital?
13.	How do present rates of pay for ward nurses, nursing assistants and orderlies at Shaughnessy hospital compare with rates of pay in other Vancouver hospitals?
14.	What increases in pay have been granted to ward nurses, nursing assistants and orderlies of Shaughnessy hospital between January 1, 1964 and November 30, 1964?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: 1. At January 1, 1964, 195; at November 30, 1964, 207.
2. 101.
3.	89.
4.	$4,050-$4,200-$4,350-$4,500 per annum.
5.	At January 1, 1964, 20; at November 30, 1964, 21.
6.	6.
7.	Five.
8.	$2,730, $2,850, $2,970, $3,090 per annum.
9.	At January 1, 1964, 216; at November 30, 1964, 216.
10.	72.
11.	72.
12.	Nursing orderly 1, $2,900, $3,050, $3,200;
nursing orderly 2,	$3,200,	$3,350, $3,500,
$3,650; nursing orderly 2A, $3,210, $3,360, $3,510, $3,660; nursing orderly 3, $3,410, $3,560, $3,710, $3,860; nursing orderly 3A, $3,750, $3,900, $4,050, $4,200; nursing orderly 4, $4,440, $4,590, $4,740, $4,890.
13.	From information received from five Vancouver hospitals it would appear that rates of pay for ward nurses, nursing assistants and orderlies are lower at Shaughnessy hospital.
14.	The following salary revisions were granted between January 1, 1964 and Novem-

ber 30, 1964 and were retroactive to January 1, 1964:
Nurse 1:	From:	$3,180,	$3,300, $3,450,
$3,600, $3,750, $3,900, $4,050, $4,200, $4,350. To: $3,480, $3,600, $3,750, $3,900, $4,050, $4,200, $4,350, $4,500.
Nurse 2: From $4,290, $4,440, $4,590, $4,740. To: $4,590, $4,740, $4,890, $5,040.
Nurse 3: From: $4,800, $4,980, $5,160, $5,340, To: $5,100, $5,280, $5,460, $5,640.
Nurse 6:	From:	$6,960,	$7,260,	$7,560,
$7,920. To: $7,260, $7,560, $7,860, $8,220.
Hospital nursing assistant: From: $2,580, $2,700, $2,820,	$2,940. To:	$2,730, $2,850,

Nursing orderly 4: From $4,290, $4,440, $4,590, $4,740. To:	$4,440,	$4,590, $4,740,


$4,890. POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION, WALLACE, N.S.
Mr. Coates: Does the government intend to call tenders for construction of a new post office in the community of Wallace. Nova Scotia and, if so (a) what dates do they feel construction will commence, and (b) on what date do they estimate the post office in question will be completed and available to the public?
Hon. Lucien Cardin (Minister of Public
Works): Yes. Tenders were called and a contract awarded January 8, 1965.
(a)	Construction commenced February 1, 1965.
(b)	April 16, 1965.


SUBSIDY ON FISHING VESSEL CONSTRUCTION
Mr. Crouse: Is any consideration being given to increasing the percentage rate of subsidy, under the fishing vessel assistance regulations, covering fishing vessels 35 feet and over, to bring the subsidy more in line with the tonnage rates formerly paid?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Consideration has been given by increasing from 25 to 30 per cent the subsidy payable on any fishing vessel having a minimum length of 45 feet and a maximum size of less than 100 gross tons.
Under existing regulations, assistance to vessels under 45 feet is limited to approved experimental designs, and no change in the rate of subsidy has been made.


OPERATION OF SERVICE STATIONS, CAMP BORDEN
Mr. Smith: 1. On federal government lands at Camp Borden are provincial regulations concerning qualifications of employees at the Canadian Petrofina station and the Imperial Esso station adhered to and, if so, in what respects?
Orders for Returns
2.	At either of these service stations are any major repairs done to automobiles and, if so, are such repairs done under the supervision of provincially licensed mechanics?
3.	What are the names of the licensed mechanics employed full time or part time at these service station garages?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: 1. Yes, under the apprenticeship and tradesmen's qualification act, statutes of Ontario.
2.	Yes.
3.	Mr. F. W. Bowes; Mr. F. R. Prime; Mr. A. Hayward.


ADVERTISING EXPENDITURES, EMERGENCY MEASURES ORGANIZATION
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	What amount did the government of Canada spend in advertising the emergency measures organization in the fiscal year 1962-63?
2.	What amount is earmarked for expenditure in the fiscal year 1963-64?
3.	What part of these funds have been made available to the province of Manitoba?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: 1.	Nil.
2.	Nil.
3.	N/A.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Enns: 1.	What has been the annual parliamentary grant to the C.B.C. for the past five years?
2.	How much has been paid per year to performers, script writers, producers (other than full time C.B.C. staff personnel) ?
3.	How much of the amount per year has been paid to Canadian talent?
4.	How many musical and dramatic productions were produced in each of the regions in each of the past five years?
5.	How many persons were on the staff of the talent relations board in Toronto in each of the past five years and what is the justification for any increase?
6.	If there is a decline in regional musical and dramatic programs, does the C.B.C. feel it is still fulfilling one of its six major aims, namely to encourage Canadian talent as reported on page 18 of current annual report?
Return tabled.


FEDERAL GRANTS TO NOVA SCOTIA
Mr. Armstrong: 1. What was the federal contribution to the province of Nova Scotia for each of the following fiscal years, 1961-62, 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1964-65 (estimated) under the following headings (a) unconditional grants, itemized (b) conditional grants, itemized (c) payments to individuals (i) unemployment payments (ii) family allowances (iii) old age security, and (iv) all others?

Orders for Returns
2.	What Is the total amount of all payments for each fiscal year mentioned above?
3.	What is the per capita contribution in each category and how does this compare with the per capita contribution to the other nine provinces?
Return tabled.


FEDERAL BUILDINGS WITH WHEEL CHAIR ENTRANCES
Mr. Howe (Hamilton: South):
1.	Which federal buildings built in the last five years include a ramp or other no-step entrance for those in wheel-chairs?
2.	Which federal buildings built in the last five years are not so equipped?
Return tabled.


CAUSEWAY CONSTRUCTION, PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND-NEW BRUNSWICK
Mr. Macquarrie: 1.	What officials or agencies of the government are studying the effects on freight movements to and from Prince Edward Island In the event of a causeway being constructed without railway tracks?
2.	Have public hearings been held and, if so, when and where were they held?
3.	Have briefs or submissions been received from any groups or individuals in the maritime provinces and, if not, is it intended to invite such briefs or submissions?
4.	What is the nature of the reply given to the proposal of Island Development Company for constructing the Prince Edward Island-New Brunswick causeway?
5.	What other company or companies have approached the government relative to the constructing of this causeway?
Return tabled.


RETENTION IN CANADA OF HISTORIC OBJECTS
Mr. Howe (Hamilton: South):
Does the government make an effort to retain in Canada, Indian, Eskimo, Norse or other relics found in Canada by investigators from other countries and, if so, what are the provisions of any related legislation or agreements?
Return tabled.


WESTMINSTER HOSPITAL, LONDON, ONT.
Mr. Irvine: 1.	What is the total number of beds in Westminster hospital, London, Ontario?
2.	What number of beds could be added without additional construction?
3.	What was the average number of beds occupied during each month in 1963?
4.	What was the daily cost per patient during 1963 (a) in active treatment unit (b) in convalescent unit (c) in domiciliary care (d) in the rehabilitation centre?
5.	What was the total number of employees in this hospital in 1963 (a) medical specialists (b)
[Mr. Armstrong.)
general practitioners (c) registered nurses (d) nurses assistants and aides (e) orderlies (f) kitchen staff (g) stenographers and office staff (h) cleaning and maintenance staff (i) other employees?
6.	What are the estimated annual costs of (a) maintenance (b) operation?
7.	In what state of repair are the main hospital buildings?
Return tabled.


C.N.R. LAND SALES AND LEASES, MONCTON, N.B.
Mr. Douglas: 1.	Did the C.N.R. sell or lease any land in Moncton since 1956 to other companies or persons and, if so, what were the terms of such sales or leases and the names of the companies or persons involved?
2.	Did the C.N.R. rent any buildings in Moncton from other companies or persons since 1955 and, if so, from whom did the C.N.R. rent such buildings?
3.	What were the terms of such leases and how much was paid in rent each year since 1955 for each building?
Return tabled.


MINERAL PRODUCTION
Mr. Tucker: What was the total production of all minerals, in tons and dollar value, in each province of Canada from (a) January 1 to December 31, 1963, nd (b) January 1 to November 31, 1964, inclusive?
Return tabled.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS

John B. Stewart: Motions 197 and 202
are acceptable to the government subject to the usual reservations concerning privileged documents between officials of different governments. I ask that the other motions be allowed to stand.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that the remaining motions be allowed to stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
SUBSIDY FOR WOODEN SHIP CONSTRUCTION Motion No. 197.-Mr. Coales:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all submissions, presentations, briefs and other documents relating to the subsidy available for the construction of wooden ships between 75 and 125 feet in length.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 202-Mr. Brewin:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence between the Department

of Citizenship and Immigration and any person regarding the deportation of (a) Onofrio Minaudo, and (b) Giuseppe Catalonotte.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: May I ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs whether he would give the house an outline of the critical and perilous position in which the United Nations finds itself as a result of the motion moved or to be moved by the ambassador from Albania. What is Canada's position to be on this question tomorrow and, if the issue comes to an actual vote in the assembly, how will Canada's vote be cast?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member for
Greenwood gave me notice of his intention to ask a question along those lines. In answer to the right hon. gentleman I would say that if tomorrow there were a confrontation on article XIX as a result of the action taken by Albania, Canada would, of course, vote in favour of the application of article XIX. However, the government hopes that a confrontation can be avoided, and that if necessary an adjournment can be arranged to permit negotiations between the parties in financial default and the other members of the United Nations.
The assembly is to resume tomorrow. However, there may well be a further adjournment. Albania is the only country which is seeking to bring on a confrontation at this time. Albania itself is in default and would be affected by article XIX, as would the Soviet union.
I regret to say that the financial situation facing the United Nations continues to present the organization with a serious crisis. There is a reluctance on the part of the Soviet union and other countries to pay a sufficient amount of money to avoid the implications of article XIX.
Canada will continue, as she has in the past, to put forward solutions which may bring about a compromise, but I must say that all the solutions put forward by Canada and indeed by other countries have been, in this regrettable situation, unavailing to date.
Inquiries oj the Ministry


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, the last time this matter was discussed in the house the hon. gentleman said that Canada had certain very definite ideas in this connection and he felt sure a solution of this matter would be brought about. What were the suggestions that Canada made? There is no reason now why we should not know; they have now been turned down, as the minister says.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I assure the right hon. gentleman that there were at least three different proposals put forward by Canada. I think the right hon. gentleman will agree that since there is to be another period of negotiation, assuming the Albanian resolution does not succeed, it would not be in the public interest to disclose those proposals until every opportunity for negotiation has been exhausted. Canada was the originator of the committee of 21. Canada expects to be appointed to another group that will meet, in the event that Albania withdraws her resolution and another period of negotiation is carried on. The solutions that Canada has put forward, together with other countries, were not contrary to the implications of article XIX.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I have not been able to interpret what the hon. gentleman had to say, but I will examine Hansard to see if it can be solved. I would ask him, in view of the fact that it has been suggested that the Prime Minister might be one of the five wise men, and he has indicated that he did not want to place himself in that category, for understandable reasons, has the Secretary of State for External Affairs agreed to substitute in that connection?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, the Secretary of State for External Affairs has not been so designated. I may say that the president of the general assembly ten days ago, when faced with what looked to be a very critical situation, made the suggestion to a number of delegations that he as president and former presidents of the general assembly, including the present Prime Minister of Canada, might use their good offices to try to impress upon the Soviet union and other defaulting countries the importance of their paying up. The organization would not then be faced with the dangerous situation in which it now finds itself. That proposal to ask former presidents of the assembly, including the present Prime Minister of Canada, to use their good offices was not proceeded with. However, I am sure the house and all

Inquiries of the Ministry Canadians would recognize that if such a proposal were to be realized there could be no more useful participant in that group than the present Prime Minister.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John George Diefenbaker: Now may I ask the
minister if he will answer this question in all modesty. Has he been suggested as a successor, or to fill the position for Canada? That is what I asked.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, may I say in connection with this matter, since the right hon. gentleman mentioned my name-and I am sure that by accident he stated that I had turned down this opportunity, or words to that effect, which is not the case-that I would not reject any responsibility of this kind if I felt it my duty to undertake it; but, like the right hon. gentleman, I am not looking for another job.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Churchill:: Mr. Lesage is looking for yours.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, in view of the latter part of the right hon. gentleman's statement a moment ago, may I say that I am; and I am looking in that direction now.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


An hon. Member:: Don't turn your back.



WHEAT-INQUIRY AS TO ESTABLISHMENT OF TWO PRICE SYSTEM

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquiflam):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the right hon. Prime Minister. In view of the substantial decline in the price of wheat in recent weeks I wonder whether the Prime Minister would be prepared to give the house and the farmers some assurance between now and the time when spring seeding will commence that it is the government's intention to take some action in this crop year to implement the Prime Minister's commitment to establish a two price system for wheat and a minimum price of $2 a bushel.


Lester Bowles Pearson: This is, of course, a very important question involving government policy, and if and when there is a statement of policy to be made on this matter, it will be made to the house.


Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Bow River):: supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Does the Prime Minister accept the viewpoint of the Minister of Agriculture when he says that the government have forgotten the promise of $2 wheat as far as the farmers are concerned? Does he go along with the Minister of Agriculture, or is it the government's intention to carry out that promise made in Alberta?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, the cabinet is united on this matter.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I can appreciate the Prime Minister saying that this is a matter of government policy which will be made known in due course, but can he at least give to the house and to the wheat producers of Canada some understanding as to whether this policy, which he enunciated in March, 1963, is still an integral part of the government's program?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Of course, Mr. Speaker, all questions concerning agricultural policy, including wheat policy, are being continually reviewed at the present time.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Justice. It relates to a Canadian citizen named Michelle Duclos, who was arrested yesterday in New York city as being implicated in a bizarre plot to blow up the statue of liberty, the liberty bell and the Washington monument.
In view of the fact that this young woman is a former employee of the C.B.C., is a present member of the R.I.N. separatist party in Quebec, was trained in Algeria and associated with the Cuban communist regime, and is now associated with the extremist left organization known as the black liberation front, does the minister not think it would be in Canada's best interests that those responsible for security in Canada inform the public as to just what subversive conspiracy and action is taking place within the country, as has been done in the United Kingdom through a recent white paper and as is being done continually in the United States through the F.B.I.? Is it possible, also, that we in Canada are enveloped in a conspiracy of silence?


Mr. Fisher:: Yes.


Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding what the official opposition might at times imply with respect to myself, I wish to say that I had nothing to do with the plot. That is the first thing. Second, if I can be serious this time, although this is the type of question which according to the rules calls for an opinion I will take the question as a very serious suggestion to look into the matter, and I will.



AIR CANADA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. It has to do with the establishment of the Thompson commission in Winnipeg in connection with the removal of Air Canada maintenance facilities from Winnipeg to Montreal. Would the Prime Minister say what is the present position? Did he receive a very strong letter from the premier of Quebec pointing out that this commission was a threat to national unity and creates an intolerable situation? Would the Prime Minister say what has passed between him and Premier Lesage in this connection, and would he also table in the house the letter which was made available to the press and published in, I think it was, Le Soleil?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, the Thompson commission to which my right hon. friend has referred has been carrying on its work and I think its hearings are just about over.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Completed.


Lester Bowles Pearson: They are completed in Winnipeg and a report will be made very shortly, I hope. There has been an exchange of communications between the prime minister of Quebec and myself on this matter. I would be very glad indeed to table this exchange, and I will get in touch with Mr. Lesage to see whether he is agreeable.


John George Diefenbaker: May I ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the Prime Minister say what answer he gave to the statement made by Premier Lesage, that "this is an affair of extreme gravity because, regrettably, it threatens to compromise our efforts
Inquiries of the Ministry to maintain the unity of the country"? Has he had any elucidation as to how this would interfere with our efforts to maintain unity?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I think my reply to the letter, which I have not before me of course, will deal with this matter. I will be glad to table it, and I hope I can get permission to table it tomorrow, in which case I hope my right hon. friend's understandable anxiety in this matter will be removed.


John George Diefenbaker: And the reply of the right hon. gentleman.


Mr. Georges Valade (St. Mary):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Prime Minister. I wonder whether the Prime Minister would care to give an answer as to why among the three commissioners of the Thompson inquiry there was no one from Quebec or the east chosen to participate in the inquiry as a commissioner?


Lester Bowles Pearson: My hon. friend is wrong in his facts, Mr. Speaker. There is only one commissioner, Mr. Thompson, a citizen of Winnipeg.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, I think the Prime Minister has misunderstood; I meant within the commission. There is a secretary and a counsel, and there is a commissioner. No one from the east has been appointed to any of these positions.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. If this is a question it should certainly be put on the order paper.



CANADIAN CONSTITUTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Marcel Lambert (Edmonton West):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister. Some time late in November I raised a question with regard to the amendments to the constitution. The Prime Minister indicated at that time the intention of the government to publish a white paper toward the end of December or early in January. Has this been done and, if not, when does the Prime Minister anticipate that this material will be put before the house?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I think I indicated yesterday that the white paper had not been tabled because it had been circulated to the provinces with a view to getting their observations, if any, upon it, and also to ensure that

Inquiries of the Ministry the references in the white paper to provincial discussions were, in the view of the provinces, accurate. We have not yet received replies from all the provinces; I think just one is outstanding. We have been in touch with that province and as soon as it replies, which I hope will be very shortly, we will then be happy to table the white paper, and I am very sorry for the delay.



CANADIAN CITIZENSHIP


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day;
Mr. J. E. Brown (Brantford):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Could the minister advise the house whether further consideration may be given to a departmental decision requiring all residents of the county of Brant in the province of Ontario who wish to become Canadian citizens or who require information regarding citizenship to apply to the court of Canadian citizenship at Hamilton rather than to the county court of the county of Brant, as evidenced by an advertisement in the Brantford Expositor on Monday, February 15?


Mr. Speaker:: It does seem to me that this is a proper question for the order paper, but I see that the minister is able and ready to answer.


Hon. J. R. Nicholson (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, there is some urgency here. I might say that not only did the hon. member give me notice of his question but an inquiry was directed to my office yesterday by the hon. member for Wellington South (Mr. Hales), and there was also an inquiry from the hon. member for Brant-Haldimand (Mr. Pennell). I am very happy to assure the hon. members and the house that further consideration will be given to this matter. I have already directed that a further study be made.


Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington South):: Would the minister give consideration to using the immigration office in the city of Guelph or Brantford, or such areas, as a clearing house for such questions concerning citizenship applications?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, I have already directed that that aspect of it be included in the study.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Leon Balcer (Three Rivers):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Agriculture, and it is this. I wonder whether the minister could give us some further explanation of two fascinating paragraphs which were included in a speech that was to be delivered today by the minister, which speech was released to the press. These two paragraphs read as follows, and I think they are quite important and quite fascinating:
Concern has been expressed that this new interbreed class might cause disharmony among our dairy breeds. I've been told it's an over-simplification of a very complicated situation to say, an udder is an udder, and it doesn't matter to what kind of cow it is attached.
This is the main point, Mr. Speaker, and these are not my words but the words of the minister who stated:
With all due respect to women and dairy cows I think the same argument applies with about as much validity to some of our beauty contests. I realize that a lot more could be said on the subject but isn't an ankle an ankle, a bosom a bosom, whether the girl is Canadian or Swedish or from Australia? After all, a cow's equipment, just like a woman's, is intended to do a certain job and the most important part of a dairy cow's equipment is the udder, regardless of her breed.
I must admit, Mr. Speaker, that this is rather fascinating, and I am wondering whether the minister would like to make a further explanation.


Harry William Hays: Mr. Speaker, every farmer in Canada will understand that language.


Mr. Martineau:: Mr. Speaker, I should like the minister to inform us whether he was enunciating official government policy.



TELEVISION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Joseph Macaluso (Hamilton West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport which relates to a subject I think is of interest to many members of this house, as well as to the television viewing public of this country. Does the minister intend to proceed during our consideration of the next supplementary estimates with the $1 item which would have the effect of putting CATV under the control of the board of broadcast governors?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I received representations from the national association a short time ago to the effect that they would prefer to have the present system of informal consultation continued until the Fowler commission has made its report. I communicated that request to my colleagues and we have decided not to proceed with the $1 item at the present time.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a supplementary question. Can the minister give us some assurance that the Fowler commission is indeed studying this question and will make recommendations with regard to community antenna television?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, of course I cannot.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Then why stall?


Mr. D. V. Pugh (Okanagan Boundary):: Mr. Speaker, will the minister now state that all applications for CATV will be processed without being delayed until the Fowler commission report is brought forward?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, all applications are dealt with as rapidly as possible after they have been received. They are all referred for informal advice to the board of broadcast governors. That practice will continue to be followed, and as quickly as that advice is received the applications will be dealt with by the minister.


David Vaughan Pugh: Is there no freezing at the present time in this regard?


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is no freezing in respect of either the receipt or consideration of applications.



EXPORTS BY CANADIAN SUBSIDIARIES OF U.S. COMPANIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Industry which relates to something of national significance and substance, and is based on the application of the United States trading with the enemy act to Canadian affiliates of United States companies operating in Canada, and on the right of Canada to make its own rules in this respect without any interference from the United States. Can the minister inform the house how many times during the past year a Canadian subsidiary of a United States
Inquiries of the Ministry corporation has been unable to trade in full compliance with Canadian laws because of the extraterritorial effect of a United States statute?


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



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Eric A. Winkler (Grey-Bruce):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Labour. In view of the government's concern about the category of unemployed can he make a statement today regarding the approximately 500,000 Canadians who find themselves unemployed?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, I informed hon. gentlemen yesterday that I would make a statement at the appropriate time, and I intend to do so.


An hon. Member:: You said that two months ago.



HOCKEY-ARTICLE IN &quot;TIME&quot; MAGAZINE

Mr. A. D. Alkenbrack (Prince Edward-Lennox):: Mr. Speaker, I rise at this time on a point of order to refute certain scurrilous statements made by Time magazine of December 25, 1964 during the recess of parliament. At page 40 of that edition, in a reference to the game of ice hockey and to a constituent of mine, Mr. Bobby Hull of the Chicago Black Hawks, one of the greatest hockey players of all time, they refer to him as a prodigy from the backwoods of Ontario. I am sure that all hon. members in this chamber will support me when I say that Prince Edward-Lennox, where Hull makes his home, is not the backwoods of Ontario, and neither is any part of the Bay of Quinte district where he was born and raised.
Prince Edward-Lennox and the Bay of Quinte districts are part of the oldest civilized and settled parts of Canada, and I remind Time magazine that this area was settled long before many parts of the western United States, and even before Chicago.
The Bay of Quinte district, the home of the United Empire Loyalists and the land of Macdonald and Canadian democracy, resents these false and belittling remarks of Time magazine, and I thank you for allowing me to correct them.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.

Inquiries of the Ministry INDUSTRY



AUTOMOBILES-CONCURRENCE OF PARLIAMENT IN AGREEMENT WITH U.S.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Reid Scott (Danforth):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Industry. It is related to the recent agreement signed by the automobile industry of the United States. Is it the intention of the government to implement a program of the size and magnitude of the one in question without the concurrence of parliament?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, as was announced during the recess at the time the program was outlined, it is the government's intention to place a resolution on the order paper and to seek parliamentary concurrence in it.



INDIAN AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker,
I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, and I preface my question by congratulating the minister on being the first British Columbian member to hold the full-time cabinet post he now holds. I hope that this situation will bring a breath of fresh western air to the circumstances existing in that department.
What is the minister's intention regarding the long awaited proposal to bring forward a bill related to the settlement of the Indian claims?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, I should like to thank the hon. gentleman for his kind words, but having been a student of history for some time I feel that I should supplement part of his remarks. There was another fulltime minister of immigration from British Columbia, the Hon. Ian Mackenzie. He held that office in 1930 for only two months. I hope my tenure will be much longer.
I have not had an opportunity as yet to study the proposed legislation, which is well advanced in respect of the Indian claims, although I have had discussions with my new deputy minister. I think in all fairness to the house, having regard to the list of legislative items placed before the house on the resumption of this session, hon. members will appreciate why the legislation is not being proceeded with at this particular session, but I


can assure hon. members that it is high on the priority list of legislative items for the next session.


Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, my initial question was related to the particular office of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration rather than to the old department of immigration.



NATIONAL DEFENCE

[Stage Direction]
C.M.R.-INQUIRY AS TO EXTENSION OF COURSE On the orders of the day:
Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolielfe-L'Assomplion-Montcalm):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to put a question to the hon. member for Terrebonne (Mr. Cadieux), whom I congratulate for his recent appointment as Associate Minister of National Defence.
Is it the intention of the Department of National Defence to give a four year university course at the College militaire de Saint-Jean, as is the case at Kingston?


Hon. Leo Cadieux (Associate Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, first I want to thank very sincerely my hon. friend from Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm for his good words.

I want also to assure every member of the house of my sincere desire to be of service to our country and to every member of parliament.

As far as my hon. friend's question is concerned, I would say that no decision has been taken on that matter yet.
He is aware that the three services are being integrated and that under that integration program a continuing study is made of the curriculum of our three military colleges, with regard to the three services.
Until those studies are completed I feel that it is impossible to predict if the curriculum of the military colleges will have to be increased or not.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert Norman Thompson: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. For some time now the hon. lady has been giving

us the assurance that the second volume of the report of the royal commission on health services would be available soon. Can she inform us now when she expects it to be tabled?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Mr. Speaker, I anticipate that the Prime Minister will be able to table this volume this week.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, February 16, consideration in committee of Bill No. C-126 respecting hours of work, minimum wages, etc.-Mr. MacEachen-Mr. Lamoureux in the chair.
On clause 5-Standard hours of work.
The Chairman:: When the committee rose yesterday clause 5 was under consideration, clauses 1 and 3 having been allowed to stand.


Mr. Weichel:: Mr. Chairman, with reference to clause 5 (1) of Bill No. C-126 may I say I was impressed with the points made and remarks by the hon. member for Prince Edward-Lennox who, incidentally, mentioned two subjects that concern my riding of Waterloo North, namely the small and medium sized independent local feed mills, and the trucking industry, which feel that certain proposals in the bill can result in costly and serious delays for a great many citizens moving household effects. By reason of the announced decision of the federal Minister of Labour, all feed mills and grain elevators in Ontario will be subject to the provisions of the proposed Canada labour standards code which, as stated, applies to a "federal work, undertaking or business".


Lucien Lamoureux: Order, please. May I direct the attention of hon. members to the fact that there is quite a bit of noise in the chamber, which is rather unfair to the member who has the floor. May we have order?


Oscar William Weichel: It was surprising to learn that feed and grain elevators of all kinds were being so classified for purposes of this labour legislation. Those concerned have been unable to obtain any explanation of why local feed mills and elevators have been declared to be "works for the general advantage of Canada". I feel it can only be assumed that such businesses were acciden-
Canada Labour Code
tally grouped with terminal and western elevators licensed under the Canada Grain Act.
I realize that the measures in the bill now before the house make provision for (a) a minimum hourly wage of $1.25 for all employees 17 years of age or over, regardless of sex; (b) a standard work week of 40 hours or eight hours a day and (c) a maximum of eight hours overtime per employee per week with minimum pay for overtime calculated at one and a half times the regular hourly rate. It is in this regard that the difficulties of the mills and truckers arise. I understand that by special permission of the Minister of Labour some additional overtime may be permitted if need is proven to the satisfaction of the minister.
While the above listed measures may not appear on the surface to be overly restrictive or costly, full compliance would adversely affect levels of labour efficiency and add materially to operating costs. It has been brought to my attention by these smaller mills that opposition to enforced involvement under this legislation is not based on any wish or desire to restrict the earning power of employees of member firms.
The operation of an average feed mill or local grain elevator does not lend itself to shift work or the employment of casual labour at peak production periods or at times of seasonal pressures such as occur during harvesting seasons. Operational skills that are only gained through training and experience are required for successful plant performance and customer servicing. Key employees cannot be relieved by inexperienced labour during rush periods, nor can plants afford anything less than the fullest utilization of available manpower.
Largely situated in rural areas or in the less populated centres of the province, local feed mills and grain elevators are not required to compete with large industrial centres for their labour requirements. If forced to operate under the jurisdiction of the federal labour code, mills and elevators so situated will be automatically deprived of the opportunity to take advantage of labour pay rates that prevail locally for local help. It could be pointed out that the most unreasonable feature of the minister's ruling in this section of industry is that members of the local feed and grain trade are being placed under federal labour jurisdiction while unrelated business operations of a local character are subject only to provincial labour regulations.

Canada Labour Code
The second point that gives us some concern with regard to Bill No. C-126 is the trucking industry. Some of the proposals incorporated in the bill are detrimental to the truckers, as I am sure we all understand, and also of course to thousands of citizens moving household effects. This legislation, if enacted in its present form, would only result in a very considerable increase in operating costs which must eventually be passed on to the public at large, thus resulting in an increase in the cost of living.
I understand some of these household moving companies do a considerable amount of business with the Department of National Defence and other government departments in connection with the movement of government personnel, and any increase in the rates charged will inevitably fall upon the taxpayers. It is a well known fact that speed of transportation is a necessary factor in today's economy. If the bill is passed with trucking included, it will prolong the time taken by these truckers in moving from point to point with resulting inconvenience to the public.
In view of the foregoing points and to prevent the interprovincial trucking industry from bearing a burden which would be intolerable to say the least, I would ask the minister to consider taking the necessary steps to exempt the trucking industry from the provisions of Bill No. C-126 and also to exempt independent, local, retail feed mills. In closing may I tell the minister that I am in favour of the principle of the bill.


Mr. Muir (Lisgar):: Mr. Chairman, when we adjourned last evening I was about to pose a question in regard to clause 5 which deals with hours of work, and I intended to query how it affects the operations of western grain elevators. Later I had occasion to discuss it briefly with the minister and, for the record, I would like him to give the western farmers the assurance he gave me last night, that the terms of the bill will not interfere with their normal delivery of grain to their local elevators.
The matter could be handled by increasing grain elevator staff, but I am sure the minister realizes this would be a poor development. The fact that there is a rush at harvest time means the hours of work have to be extended, and under the quota system there are several periods during a year when the operation of an elevator could not be satisfactorily maintained under an eight hour day rule.
[Mr. Weichel.l
I would like the minister to give the committee the assurance which he gave me last night that this clause of the bill will not apply in such a situation.


Lucien Lamoureux: The hon. member for
Queens-Lunenburg.


George Robson Muir: Would the minister undertake to answer my question?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I was hoping I could listen to as many views as possible before trying to deal with the industry problems that have been raised and giving my appreciation of the way the bill can be adapted to the circumstances in each particular industry. I have certainly heard a great deal about the grain elevators. I am satisfied, and I shall say so later, that the operations of these elevators can be conducted efficiently and with full service to the farmers within the provisions of the bill.


Mr. Crouse:: Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to speak at great length and create unnecessary delay in the passage of this bill. I should like to place on record that I am in agreement with its general purpose. However, when the bill was introduced I placed some questions to the minister concerning its application to the fishing industry, and in view of the many clauses in part I dealing with hours of work I believe these points should be clarified before the bill is passed.
As is stated in the title, this is a bill respecting hours of work, minimum wages, annual vacations and holidays with pay in federal works, undertakings and businesses, but it is somewhat difficult to determine exactly the meaning of federal businesses and undertakings.
Clause 3(l)(a) says the bill will apply to-
-any work, undertaking or business carried on for or in connection with navigation and shipping, whether inland or maritime, including the operation of ships and transportation by ship anywhere in Canada.
I ask the minister would this apply only to ships operated by the government, or does it apply to all Canadian owned ships operating within Canadian territorial waters? Does it apply to our coastal freighters as well as to ships operating between our provinces? Does it apply to our deep sea fishing fleet operating out of our coastal ports?
When I asked these questions on October 19 last year the minister, as recorded at page 9203 of Hansard, replied that the matter of trawlers operating out of a fish plant would ultimately be a question for the Canadian

courts to determine, and expressed the view that trawlers operating as part of a fish plant on shore would come under provincial jurisdiction. He also stated that already one fishermen's union had been certified under provincial labour legislation. I presume he was referring to a fishermen's union in British Columbia because to my knowledge there is no deep sea fishermen's union certified or functioning on the Atlantic coast.
In addition to this there are independent trawlers which function for the shore based fish plants and which operate under what might be called a gentlemen's agreement. What would be the position of these independent operators if this bill applies to their industry? In view of these facts I now ask the minister to make a clear statement on the application of the bill to the Canadian fishing industry, with particular emphasis on its application to our deep sea fishing fleet.
I know that as a fellow mariner he would not wish to have a bill passed by this parliament that would cause the operators of our deep sea trawlers to go to the courts in order to ascertain the legality of working irregular hours, sometimes 20 or more hours a day, which is standard for fishing crews when operating at sea and when they have a good catch of fish. Due to the perishable nature of the catch it is absolutely impossible to adopt regular hours of employment on a fishing dragger.
Normally a dragger is allowed 10 or 12 days at sea. At the end of that time it must return to port so that its catch can be processed and shipped to market in prime condition. While it is on the fishing banks storms can occur, and the actual catching of fish is at irregular hours. Anyone who has gone fishing knows a whole day may pass without a nibble and just as you start to go home the fish start to bite. The same applies in our deep sea fishing operations, and when the fish are running they must be cleaned and placed below decks regardless of the hours of work involved.
After reading the hours of work as defined on page 4 of the bill I say frankly to the minister that it will have disastrous effects on our fishing industry and the income of our fishermen if these provisions are applied to them. All of the men engaged in the fishing industry are naturally concerned about this bill.
Today we have a whaling industry on both the Pacific and Atlantic coasts, and the whaling ships operate with permanent employees. In addition to the actual fishermen there is
Canada Labour Code
another class of employees involved, the truck drivers who deliver the fish from the processing plants on the Atlantic coast to places in Quebec, Ontario and the United States market. These men are also vitally concerned about the application of the bill to their industry. It is not at all unusual to see large transport trucks leaving Lunenburg, Nova Scotia, at seven or eight o'clock at night, or on a Sunday, following the landing of a large catch of fish which is perishable and which must be quickly transported to market.
The truck drivers are willing to work irregular hours, and long hours, because the transportation of fish provides them with steady employment. The very nature of the business would not permit unnecessary delays imposed as a result of the provisions of this bill. I hope the minister will answer some of these questions which are disturbing people in the fishing industry.
One final criticism I have to make of the bill is that it is almost wide open in its application and vests too much authority in the minister. One of the two amendments he has mentioned deals with the transitional provisions and deferments which may be granted by the minister if he is satisfied they are necessary; but on reading the entire bill it can be seen final authority always rests with the minister. If this be necessary then it is good that the minister is a representative from Nova Scotia, but this is just one more instance of the growing bureaucracy and red tape woven around the Canadian people by this government. It is the further concentration of power in the hands of a few people-


Lucien Lamoureux: I have to interrupt the hon. member to remind him that we are dealing with clause 5, which is a specific clause.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: Thank you. I was about to conclude my remarks.
I would say that in the final analysis the continually expanding bureaucracy which the Canadian people are facing today is limiting the freedom of individual citizens of this country.


John Carr Munro: I wish to make a few comments with respect to this clause. A good deal was said during the latter part of last evening with regard to the trucking industry, and more has been said today. I believe it should be pointed out that the amendment to clause 51 and the averaging provisions in clause 5 are sufficiently wide in scope to deal with the objections which the trucking industry has raised. The averaging provisions allow some 400 hours for a steady year of employ-

Canada Labour Code
ment. This is provided without there being any necessity for an amendment to the bill.
Then again, the provisions of the proposed amendment permit the minister to defer the application of the restriction on hours in the case of any particular industry for a period of 18 months. The amendment goes on to provide that this period may be further extended as a result of the findings of an inquiry which may be set up, should the inquiry determine that a longer period of deferment, or suspension, is necessary on the grounds that an industry was unduly disturbed by the terms of the legislation. So, the trucking industry has the 400 hour leeway provided by the bill. It is entitled to apply for an extension of 18 months and, in addition, if it can be shown that the application of this measure has caused undue dislocation, it can secure a further extension of the period mentioned. Machinery exists under the Inquiries Act for full investigation.
In these circumstances it is difficult for me to understand how much further we could go in labour legislation in order to satisfy any particular group which was dissatisfied with the bill, without exempting that group entirely from its provisions-and I do not believe it would be the desire of any hon. member that the trucking industry should be exempted from the provisions of this bill. We all know there is a legitimate grievance inasmuch as those truckers who operate inter-provincially would be placed in unfair competition with others whose operations are carried on exclusively within the boundaries of one province. But the averaging provision and, in particular, the provisions for deferment to which I have called attention could conceivably allow them an indefinite period in which to comply with the requirements of the bill, and in these circumstances I do not believe there ought to be any strong objection from the trucking industry.
In the additional time available, provincial legislatures could set standards for intraprovincial truckers to comply with minimum requirements similar to those set out in the bill before us. The net result undoubtedly will be the enactment of provincial legislation setting standards similar to those which are contained in the bill before us. As a result, the interprovincial truckers will not be in unfair competition with their competitors.
A good deal has been said during this discussion about the objections of the trucking industry and the steps which have been taken to meet those objections. We have heard little, if anything, about the advantages which will
[Mr. Munro.l
ultimately accrue to the industry when uniform legislation exists throughout the country applying to truckers under both federal and provincial jurisdiction. The latter will ultimately, I am sure, have the benefit of minimum standards similar to those now to be enacted. This will come about as a result of the pressure which will be brought to bear on provincial legislatures not only by the truckers themselves but by ordinary common sense.
I should like to refer to a brief submitted by the international brotherhood of teamsters. This document called attention to some of the hazards which are ever present in the life of a transport driver because of failure to limit hours of work. The brief tells us how in many cases such men have lost their lives on the highway in accidents caused by fatigue due to long hours spent at the wheel, or by the use of pep pills to stay awake. Sometimes the reactions of drivers are adversely affected by the taking of these pills in order to complete a haul over long distances under pressure of time.
I believe the committee would be interested in the findings of an Ontario magistrate. The case I have in mind is an example of the serious accidents which can be caused by driver fatigue. The magistrate is referring to a fatal accident which took place on June 19, 1964; he felt it served to highlight the entire problem which truck drivers face. Four members of an Ottawa family were killed in a flaming head-on crash with a truck on highway 69 near Pointe au Baril. The truck driver suffered severe burns. The impact exploded 100 gallons of gasoline in the truck. Perhaps I could read at this point from the document before me.
When the case came to court, the crown maintained that the reason the truck driver was travelling in the wrong lane and tailed to avoid collision was because he had gone to sleep at the wheel. Stressing the laws covering dangerous driving, the crown cited other cases of drivers becoming drowsy due to excessive hours on the road and thus being guilty of driving in a manner dangerous to the public.
Magistrate F.C. Powell who tried the case in Parry Sound had this to say in his summation:
There is ample evidence to show that the defendant who had been working and driving for the greater part of 30 hours prior to the collision with very little if any sleep, and driving over 500 miles in that period, knew or should have known, as he said to Mr. Wing (crown witness) that he should have pulled off the road and had a sleep. Therefore, I find that the collision was caused by the defendant going to sleep when he needed rest and thus allowing his truck to travel on a course into the path of the northbound Vauxhall. This amounts to driving dangerously-

Then he went on to say when he was imposing sentence, showing his understanding of the problem:
In the first place, the offence that you have committed-
He is referring in this particular case to the fault on the part of the truck driver:
-requires that the court impose a penalty which will be a deterrent to others who would run the risk of falling asleep while driving a motor vehicle. In my mind, to drive while you are overtired and knowing that you need sleep is Just as bad as driving while you are impaired by alcohol.
Then he says:
This must be a deterrent which is especially important to truck drivers generally who would drive their vehicles under such conditions. The majority of truck operators have set hours for their drivers.
Then he goes on with this important comment:
I realize that independent drivers are allowed to operate regardless of how many hours they are on the road and this should be discouraged because it is something which is a hazard to the general public using the highway.
In most provinces of this country there is no limitation on the hours a transport driver drives his truck. In Ontario I understand there is a limitation of 60 hours, which has never had any history of enforcement. I am only pointing this out, Mr. Chairman, because we have heard one side and surely we should hear the other side, which involves the many employees in the trucking industry. I cannot help but feel that the provisions of this legislation, even though they may not apply now, as I say, may be an encouragement to all the provincial legislatures across this country to impose similar legislation so that we will have an end to the excessive hours that drivers of transports are driving on the highway, causing death to others in many cases, a danger to other citizens on the highway and, last but not least, involving many of them who have a history of overwork over a period of 10 or 15 years, winding up being burned out and having to find other employment.
Therefore I would hope the committee would feel that the hours of work provisions in this particular bill, when considered in conjunction with the averaging provisions of the proposed amendment to clause 51, are ample to deal with the objections of the trucking industry and have taken their viewpoint into account. I would therefore hope that the committee would let the clause pass.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. member a question. Without at all
Canada Labour Code
passing any judgment on the merits or demerits of long hours of driving, does the hon. member feel that any of this legislation will affect the independent owner-driver; because there is no legislation that will affect him? As a second question, does the hon. member think that this legislation will in any way prevent a trucking company from entering into a leasing agreement with a driver, so that it will appear that the driver is an owner-driver-this is often done in the case of taxicabs-thereby escaping the provisions of the legislation?


John Carr Munro: I would say that all those owner-drivers who are involved in federal industries or are operating under a licence that is interprovincial, as distinct from those operating within one province, are going to come under the provisions of this particular legislation.


Mr. Starr:: No.


John Carr Munro: That being the case, I would think this is going to be a protection for those independent owners. If they are intimately connected with federal industries and their operations are interprovincial in scope, I think this legislation would apply. If the hon. member thinks it would not, I would like to hear his opinion; but that is certainly my impression.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Since when is an independent operator an employee?


John Carr Munro: I had not taken that particular case into account. If an independent owner is the only driver, I suppose in that particular operation he would not come under the provisions of the bill. I preconceived the notion, when the hon. member put his question, that most independent owners who would be in the type of operation that is interprovincial in scope would not have such a small unit of operation such as would require his being the only driver in the operation. Surely, Mr. Chairman, the finance arrangements in applying for a licence in those circumstances are such that he would have to have a bigger operation than that.
I would be interested in seeing the statistics, but certainly in an independent operation where the owner was the only driver I would think mostly local cartage would be involved, or that type of thing, within an urban area. The hon. member is shaking his head. I would like him to point out any great incidence of this type of operation on an interprovincial basis.

Canada Labour Code


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Just as a carry-over of that question, Mr. Chairman, perhaps the parliamentary secretary will address himself to the point I have raised. What, in the legislation, will prevent a trucking firm from entering into ownership and lease-back arrangements with drivers so that they may appear to be independent operators and therefore not employees in the true sense of the term?


Mr. Nesbitt:: Mr. Chairman, I had originally intended to make a number of remarks with regard to the trucking industry, but some of the answers have already been given by the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of National Health and Welfare; also, some of of the observations I had intended to make have already been made by the hon. member for Waterloo North, the hon. member for Wellington South, the hon. member for Prince Edward-Lennox and others. Therefore I will not take up the time of the committee in again covering this ground. However, I would like to take about two minutes to raise the question of local feed mills in the province of Ontario in particular. Again, this subject has been dealt with at some length by the hon. member for Wellington South, the hon. member for Middlesex West, I believe, the hon. member for Waterloo North and others.
However, Mr. Chairman, in addition to what these hon. members have already pointed out there are other points I would like to bring to the attention of the minister before he answers these questions. With respect to local feed mills my first question is as to whether such regulations would not be ultra vires; in other words, I believe that this legislation cannot attempt to deal with local feed mills in the province of Ontario. In this regard I would mention that most of these feed mills in Ontario are, I believe, already covered by provincial labour regulations. In addition to this, many of the employees who would come under this proposed federal legislation work with others employed only in the retail aspects of these small feed mills. This would create discrimination and confusion in the case of workers working side by side under two totally different sets of labour regulations.
I hope the minister has been able to hear what I have had to say in this matter and will be able to answer the questions later, because these points, in addition to those already raised, are worthy of attention, in my opinion. I do not think it will be the minister's intention, or anybody else's, to have workers in [Mr. Munro.l
small industries, working side by side, with one group under one set of regulations and another under another set of regulations.
I would again point out to the minister that in effect local, small feed mills in Ontario are already covered by adequate provincial regulations which are very similar to those proposed. I would hope that the minister, when he is elucidating on the matter in a few moments, would clarify these points.


Eric Alfred Winkler: Mr. Chairman, some of the points that I had in mind have already been raised, and therefore I will delete those from my remarks. I was also interested in hearing what the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of National Health and Welfare had to say.
I am also wondering about the 400 hour exemption referred to in the legislation applied in certain cases over an 18 month period. But the thing which mostly concerns me in this bill is the ministerial discretion that exists. I believe it is needless for me to say that the absolute power which the minister is given not only lends itself, in the old phrase, to corruption but eventually to absolute power here and there; and we all know what the rest of the phrase is. I do not think that the discretionary power which exists in this legislation is good, because there is no alternative of an appeal. If such were the case I think we might move along a little faster with this piece of legislation. However, because of the fact that we are on clause 5 in part I of the bill I think it might be wiser to stand this particular clause and move along to clause 51 which is of a much more general nature-


Mr. Baldwin:: And 35.


Eric Alfred Winkler: Yes, and 35-if the minister would consider such a suggestion. These are very important clauses to the entire legislation and to the matter I have just raised.
I, like other hon. members, have some misgivings about this legislation, perhaps because of lack of understanding; I do not stand here and deny that. One of the matters in regard to this very clause about which I should like a very clear understanding from the minister, concerns whether the amendments which are proposed-as a matter of fact, for that matter all the amendments proposed-have been submitted to those affected, and whether there is an area of agreement as to the changes in the legislation which these amendments would create. It was my understanding that some of these organizations had made rep-

reservations to the minister and that the changes which would emanate from such representations would probably bring about the desired result.
One of my colleagues on this side referred to the situation of the trucker in business for himself, who is his own supervisor and is self-employed because he owns his own tractor. This is not an unusual situation. The self-employed man who owns his tractor, and there are many of them, can conceivably, and does of course, enter into an agreement with a trucking firm who owns the vans, which vans could be involved in interprovincial trucking. Therefore the company owning the vans, as I understand it, will be affected by this legislation whereas the independent trucker, the man owning his own tractor, being self-employed will not be affected by the legislation.
So far as the trucking industry is concerned, I would think that if an exemption were considered on the basis of the percentage of interprovincial business of trucking firms it would be more consistent with the spirit of what the legislation endeavours to achieve. Because unquestionably a hardship will be created upon a company which does, shall I say, 5, 10, perhaps up to 25 per cent- it is not for me to judge-of its business interprovincially, the rest of it being done within the province. If the minister's mind is open to such a change I think it would be a good thing, because in the case of a man who does, shall I say, only 5 per cent of his business interprovincially all that is left to him is the application of this legislation in due course.
I do not wish the members of this committee this afternoon to think for one moment that I consider that the general principle of the bill is not good. I believe it is. It might be very easy to construe my speech as an antilabour speech or a pro-management speech. But this is certainly not the case, because the trucking industry, in my opinion, has absolutely no concern with the application of the hourly rate. I think there are very few truckers today working anywhere near the minimum wages referred to in the terms of the bill. Therefore I would ask the minister whether, in the course of his discussions with the trucking industry or with the employees associations in the trucking industry, this point has been brought out or elaborated upon, and whether the legislation which is now before us was accepted by them. If we knew that, I think it would assist us in 20220-724J
Canada Labour Code
moving along somewhat faster. However, we want to know whether these people have been consulted on both sides of the question; and we want to know whether there is a reasonable degree of satisfaction.
Before leaving that particular point I have a quotation from the minister's speech delivered on November 19, 1964. These are the minister's own words:
They have expressed concern regarding their competitive position in relation to trucking firms operating solely within provincial jurisdictions. I have assured them we will invite the provincial departments ol labour to consider jointly practical steps which can be taken to bring about a common approach to the two fields of jurisdiction.
Here again is another area about which I would ask the minister whether consultation has taken place.
On examining the figures made available to me by the province of Ontario I could see where anomalies are distinctly created in connection with the weekly allowed hours, permitted overtime, and maximum weekly working hours. There is a difference between the 48 hours permitted under the federal legislation and the 60 hours permitted under the legislation of the province of Ontario. Therefore I hope that the minister will be able to give us some satisfactory explanation in reply to these questions.
I would also refer, as have many others, to the feed grain business, which is an important business in my area. Because of the interest shown in this matter by other hon. members I am sure the minister understands how widely this legislation affects certain people; and I noted the remarks of the speakers from Ontario in particular. I also believe that the terms of this legislation should apply to elevator operators in the province of Ontario situated along the lakes, those who have close association with the grain industry in western Canada. No doubt most of them are subsidiaries of western operators in one way or another, and I believe these people may well come within the terms of the legislation.
However, Mr. Chairman, my concern is not there; my concern is in the next step down, in the feed mill area. I am glad the Minister of Agriculture is in the committee this afternoon because I have received letter after letter not only from farmers but from mill operators stating that this legislation will increase their costs, and that it is a serious matter in the eyes of the people concerned. Let me point out just one or two of these situations, because this is one means by

Canada Labour Code
which constituents can place their views before parliament in advance of the passage of legislation.
This letter was written by an individual who operates a small feed mill in the little village of Holstein located in the centre of my constituency. I hope the minister will listen to what this man has to say, because I feel he expresses the general feeling held by individuals in similar positions. I believe this general opinion was reached as a result of meetings, and although the phraseology is perhaps similar in each case, the feeling is expressed in somewhat different ways and in broader terms.
Mr. N. E. McGuire, president of McGuire and Greenwood Limited, which sounds like a large concern but in reality is a very small operation, has this to say:
Inability to obtain any explanation for declaring local feed mills and elevators to be "works for the general advantage of Canada", it can only be assumed that such businesses were accidentally grouped with terminal and western elevators licensed under the Canada Grain Act.
It is for that reason I suggest it may be logical and sensible for elevators to be included in this category, but not feed mills.
Mr. McGuire then states:
Measures of the bill now before parliament make provision for-
He then quotes several provisions, but I am concerned with his comments. He states:
This 40 hour week would put us in a bad situation with the farmers. We have never had any trouble with our employees over a few extra hours a week to accommodate our trade. In a retail feed and chopping business you cannot close your doors in a customer's face, because of labour's restricted hours.
The next statement is one to which I feel the Minister of Agriculture should also listen. Mr. McGuire states:
The farmers are having a hard enough battle to make ends meet-and the smaller feed mill business is also affected.
The agricultural industry in the province of Ontario is declining, and if you will allow me to make a few remarks in this regard, Mr. Chairman, I should like to state that recent statistics relating to rural agricultural life in Ontario indicate a very grim picture, in spite of what the Minister of Agriculture has said.


Harry William Hays: May I ask the hon. gentleman ;a question?


Eric Alfred Winkler: Yes.
IMr. Winkler.]


Harry William Hays: How much additional cost will be attached to 100 pounds of feed sold to the farmers as a result of this legislation?


Eric Alfred Winkler: Mr. Chairman, I am as sure that the minister does not expect me to answer that question here this afternoon as I am sure that he himself does not know the answer.
This situation is serious, Mr. Chairman, and the provisions of this bill will lessen the margin of profit to feed mill operators, preventing them from carrying out their functions in an efficient manner, and will limit their service to a farmer. The government should be more interested in creating incentives rather than restrictions.
In view of the fact the minister has opened this line of thought, I should like to state that in the Georgian bay area both industry and agriculture are declining. In view of that fact I am sure he will realize that every restriction of this kind, no matter how slight, is a serious threat to the well-being of the people in this area.
Mr. Chairman, I also have with me a letter from a farm group which expresses exactly that same point of view. These people all support the suggestion that feed mills should be exempted from the terms of this bill. In support of that statement I should like to refer briefly to a situation with which I am personally familiar. A farmer who is well known to me operates a small feed mill, and his experienced help receive greater remuneration and benefits than are set forth in the terms of this bill. This farmer is an efficient businessman and makes a profit, and once a year he shares a large percentage of that profit with his employees. I am sure that following the passage of this bill those employees will not be as well off as they are at the present time. This bill will of course eliminate that profit sharing arrangement.
In order to facilitate further consideration of this bill I will now summarize what I have said, Mr. Chairman. I suggest to the minister at this time that it would be appropriate to stand our discussion regarding clause 5 and move to a consideration of clause 51, which is the more important clause of this bill in terms of application.


Mr. Barnett:: Mr. Chairman, I must say that I find myself reduced almost to tears after listening to the very sad story of the apparent plight in which the people of the province of Ontario find themselves at the present time. The candour of the hon. member for Grey-Bruce has been refreshing, par-

ticularly when one remembers the number of years during which the Conservative administration has been in power in this province. It is refreshing to hear him stand up on the floor of this house and admit that such things as the 60 hour work week minimum does exist in the province of Ontario.
Mr. Chairman, I rise at this time to speak for a few minutes in reference to a subject matter raised earlier this afternoon by the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg in respect of how the hours of work section of this bill may affect the fishing industry. Like the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg, I am interested in any clarifications of the situation in respect of constitutional jurisdiction which the minister is able to provide.
The hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg did make some reference to the situation which exists in the province of British Columbia, from which I come. He quite correctly referred to the fact that some employees in British Columbia who work on fishing vessels have been certified under provincial labour jurisdiction. However, in considering the basic principle set out in clause 5 of this bill, establishing the eight hour day and the 40 hour week, one must realize that the fishermen of British Columbia, either employees or employers, will not really be concerned about its application, even though they may be under federal rather than provincial jurisdiction, particularly because the application of the averaging principle, which has been suggested, could be made applicable to certain types of industries.
Many of our coastal vessels come under federal labour jurisdiction, but my understanding is that the basic work pattern which has been established as a result of union negotiations both in respect of the fishing industry under provincial jurisdiction and the fishing industry under federal jurisdiction, as well as in fields of operations such as our coastal tow boats, is a pattern which does conform to the principle of the eight hour day and 40 hour week. This is particularly true when one takes into account the arrangement for averaging the hours of work over an appropriate period of time.
If conditions in the maritime fishing industry are such that any member of this house is concerned that the rather modest proposals with regard to the limitation of hours of work set forth in the bill as minimum standards will have a bad effect upon the operation of that industry, I suggest there are other steps that should be taken to correct the situation, rather than allowing a
Canada Labour Code
situation to continue which makes it difficult for the industry to operate under the proposals of the bill if one takes into account the suggestion that the principle of averaging be applied in an appropriate manner. I suggest that those who speak for areas of the Atlantic coast where fishing is an important segment of their industry could better direct their efforts to improving the basic operating conditions of that industry in such a way that any modest proposals with regard to limitation of hours of work in line with what are considered to be appropriate standards in this day and age would not be a matter of concern to employers, employees or anyone else.
In so far as the bill may apply in any way to the British Columbia fishing industry, I certainly want to make it clear that so far as I am concerned I think its effects cannot be anything but beneficial provided, as I say, appropriate arrangements are worked out in respect of averaging. Obviously a vessel cannot suddenly halt its operations in mid-ocean, but I am sure arrangements can be worked out in that connection. I hope the minister will make it clear in what way the bill and the hours of work section in particular will or will not apply to employees in the fishing industry.


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Chairman, I think the general approbation with which the bill was received in the house on second reading shows that so far as the principle is concerned the bill is generally well accepted throughout Canada. However, the fact that the minister saw fit to make certain proposals in the statement he made yesterday would indicate that he has found, as I was sure he was bound to find, that a measure of this kind cannot be standardized and rigidly enforced throughout the entire country. There must be provision for flexibility and variation according to local conditions.
We are engaged, Mr. Chairman, in the consideration of clause 5 but in coming to a decision whether or not as a member of the committee I wish to give my unqualified approval to clause 5 or wish to oppose or vary it I am compelled to look at the very logical statement the minister made yesterday in which he said he was going to propose certain amendments when we come to clause 51. While I may be out of order in what I am about to say, as the minister was yesterday and as many other members have also been, I submit that the only intelligent way to examine clause 5 is to examine it in the light of what is proposed and envisaged by

Canada Labour Code
way of amendment with regard to clause 51. To make a reasonable appraisal of our position we should be able to look at clause 5 primarily but in the light of clause 51 and also clause 35. So I am dealing with clause 5 but, as I say, I cannot do so intelligently without some regard to what the minister said yesterday. This brings me immediately, of course, to what the minister did say and what is proposed in the amendments, because only through an interpretation of them am I in a position to express my views on clause
5.
Some of my colleagues have made reference already to the question of ministerial discretion. I cannot deal with that without reference to clause 3 of the bill. This clause, which has already been considered, refers to the legislation applying to "any work, undertaking or business". I call the attention of the committee to the fact that the words used there are in the singular, "work, undertaking or business", and as I construe the clause it would appear that clause 5 and clause 51 could be applied to any single business which is federal in nature. Consequently one can contemplate a situation where the rigid operation of clause 5 with regard to a number of businesses might be subject to applications under clause 51 by any one of those businesses or works or undertakings for suspension, deferment or outright cancellation of the application of clause 5. This, of course, does give me great anxiety, as I am sure it does the minister who, if this legislation goes through in its present form, will have all these difficult and worrisome problems deposited on his doorstep. He will have to exercise his discretion in respect of these issues.
Under the proposed clause 51 the minister may by order-I emphasize the word "may" -defer or suspend the operation of part I in respect of any federal work or undertaking. He can do so where it has been established to his satisfaction, as I take it, that the application of clause 5 would be or is unduly prejudicial to the interests of the employees, or would be or is seriously detrimental to the operation of the federal work, undertaking or business. I am concerned in this respect. The minister having had it established to his satisfaction that such is the case, does the use of the word "may" mean that the minister still has a choice? Once it has been established to his satisfaction within the meaning of paragraph (a) or (b) of subclause 1 of clause 51, can the minister still exercise his discretion? Does the word "may" mean that he can

reject his own findings and refuse to defer or suspend the operation of part I with regard to a particular business or undertaking or is it that the word "may" must be interpreted in the sense that it means "shall"? These words are interchangeable. Once the minister has found to his satisfaction that these conditions exist, must he make this order of deferment or suspension? I think the minister should tell us now because on his answer may depend our views as to what he should do with regard to clause 5.
I pass on to the next part of the proposed new clause 51 which provides that a longer period of deferment or suspension or, indeed, the actual rejection of the operation of that entire part of the act may be provided in the case of a business or undertaking after an inquiry has been held under clause 35. Again the word used there is "may". I am assuming that a situation might arise where an inquiry has been held. A work, or undertaking or industry has appeared and made representations in the inquiry to the commissioner named under the Inquiries Act, has established certain facts and the result of the inquiry has been a finding-it would be an absolute finding of fact by the commissioner within section 51(2). Under those circumstances is there still a discretion left to the minister? May he refuse to accept the finding of the inquiry, or is he compelled to accept and make the recommendation to the governor in council, which in turn is compelled to issue the order?
I think this is tremendously important because it means that a vested right may accrue to the business, to the undertaking or the venture, on the finding by the inquiry, and the refusal of the minister or governor in council to order might give to the business the right to compel, through mandamus or otherwise, that the finding be followed.
I believe we should hear from the minister before passing clause 5. We should know his view as to whether he would be compelled to follow this finding by the commissioner appointed under the Inquiries Act.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, the last subclause of the proposed clause 51, as suggested by the minister, is to the effect that the governor in council upon the recommendation of the minister, with or without an inquiry pursuant to clause 55, may by order vary and exempt from time to time any order made under subclause 2.
I can envision a situation where a dozen individual businesses might apply for exemption, following which there would be an in-

quiry under clause 35, with respect to some of them. An order in council may be passed exempting them from the provisions of this legislation. If I construe subclause 5 under its literal sense it means the minister may then, without any inquiry, remove from any of those businesses the suspension or cancellation which was granted to them. This is a very invidious situation.
I would certainly like to feel that before passing clause 5 we shall hear from the minister as to whether or not in his opinion the removal of any cancellation under subclause 5 will only take place following an inquiry. If not, what are the reasons he sees fit to give to the committee for clause 5 being left as it is?
Finally, the same wording applies. The word there is "may." The minister still has the ministerial discretion despite any finding that may be made.
I am not trying to be difficult or technical. I am just trying to look ahead to a number of situations that are bound to arise. In view of the fact that over a period of three months since the legislation was last before the committee all these problems have arisen and been brought to the attention of the minister and other members of the committee, it indicates the dangers which may lie ahead if this legislation is pursued without the most careful examination. I have heard from a great many industries. I am not going to pursue an argument in that connection because all the arguments have been well made by my colleagues on this side of the chamber. However, I invite the minister to reply to these questions I have raised and I would hope we might have an opportunity, after hearing his reply, of suggesting what in our views might be more suitable wording for clause 51, to add to what he suggested in his speech last night.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: May I just make a comment or two on the procedural aspects raised by the hon. member and the chief opposition whip. I suppose that in a bill of this kind all the parts somehow have a relation one to the other. But surely it is not suggested it is impossible to deal with part I and reach decisions on these propositions without reaching a decision simultaneously on clause 51. It is possible for the committee on clause 5 to decide whether these propositions are acceptable or not. The same is true of the subsequent clauses up to clause 10. These are standard principles established in the bill, and clause 51 establishes the method by which
Canada Labour Code
these standard principles may be varied to meet special situations.
I agree that the questions raised by the hon. member for Peace River are important, but I do not think it is good procedure to attempt to deal, as my hon. friend was in fact doing, with the application clause to which we shall come later, when discussing the hours of work part and the special and transitional part. The application clause, as my hon. friend realizes, has been stood and will be dealt with later.
I would urge the committee to deal with these clauses concerning hours of work. They are standard provisions. When we come to clause 51 the committee will then be able to judge whether the proposal I have made is sound, whether it provides sufficient flexibility and whether the powers given to the minister are suitable or otherwise. But I really cannot accept the proposal that we have to deal with clause 51, which provides the method of variation, without dealing with the standard principles embodied in part I.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: In reply to the minister's observations, he is almost asking a man to jump out of an aircraft and then we will decide what kind of parachute we will give him to relieve his fall on the ground. Where hon. members have found some difficulty in the application of clause 5, or the principles of clause 5, the minister has come forward with an amendment in order to relieve, and certainly the two must be related. We cannot say we will apply the acceptance clause if clause 51, or the relieving clause, in the minds of hon. members is somewhat deficient.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: But my hon. friend-


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: It is not good enough to say jump out of the aircraft and then you can grab a parachute.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Will my hon. friend not agree that we will have full opportunity, when we come to clause 51, to propose alterations to that clause? My hon. friend is saying he is unable to accept the 40 hour week, or eight hour day, without at the same time determining the method by which these standards may be varied. I suggest the orderly way is to see whether these principles in general are acceptable and then, in the light of the industry representations and the views put forward, to see whether the flexibility or transitional clause is adequate to meet these industry situations. I think it is quite disorderly to attempt to establish the variations without establishing the principles first.

Canada Labour Code


Mr. Smith:: I think what makes it hard to agree with the minister, who is somehow suggesting that we pass the bill now and legislate later, is the fact that the very first words of clause 5 say, "Except as otherwise provided-" I would like him to comment, when dealing with clause 5, on the provision for averaging over a period of two or more weeks. Would it be contemplated under this clause that this would extend as an average over the whole shipping season in a lake port where there are a very small number of longshoremen employed, or over a whole season in an industry, or does this mean just a two, or three, or four weeks average? It would change the attitude of many people if they were to know it could be a seasonal average.
I am sorry to get back to clause 51 again, but how costly are these inquiries likely to be to an employer or class of employer? Are they to be full-scale semi-judicial inquiries which would put industry to a great deal of expense? It should be borne in mind that many of these applications are likely to come from small industries, marginal industries, and it would be comforting if we could be reassured that the inquiries are to be of an informal nature, putting the employers or the industries concerned to a minimum of expense.
The final question I should like to ask is this: Suppose an industry has been granted an exemption for 18 months, an inquiry is ordered, and the inquiry has not been completed before the expiration of that 18 month period. Is there any provision for the continuance of the exemption beyond the 18 month period until the determination of the inquiry in such circumstances?


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: There is one point which puzzles me about the application of clause 5 and the transitional features. The minister will I hope excuse me if I refer to the effect of clause 51. How long would it take to make the necessary orders? Once the fact is promulgated, any industry which feels it should not be directly affected, and which feels it is entitled to transitional exemption is, nevertheless, bound for the period between the coming into effect of the legislation and any order which may be made by the minister. The act comes into force and then submissions may be made. The provisions of clause 5 will apply.
As far as clause 5 itself is concerned 1 should like to repeat the words of the hon. member for Simcoe North. If we knew the period of averaging it would be of considerable assistance to us. I am thinking of a
[Mr. MacEachen.l
particular industry with which I do not think the minister has had much acquaintance- pipe line contracting and the oil industry generally. In this field we know that talk about so many hours to be spent at work is just a lot of nonsense. The men themselves are not interested in the regulation of their hours of work. Let us consider a classic example. In wintertime in certain areas of northern Alberta and northeastern British Columbia it takes between six and eight hours to get to a drill site from a camp site. The men go out in a bombardier or similar tracked vehicle, or in a special type of truck. They work for as long as they can and they return to the camp site when they are relieved by another crew. It is all working time as far as the men are concerned. They are paid for it. Nobody would spend eight hours travelling, then stand down for a period, then work a shift and then stand down before going back. It is unrealistic. These men are paid appropriate wages-in fact their wages make the scale set out in this bill look puny. But this bill would impose upon them a fixed period of time during which they were permitted to work, either in a day or in a week.
In the absence of any indication of what the averaging is to be, the minister is asking us to buy a pig in a poke. I think it is incumbent upon the minister to give the committee an indication of what he has in mind. Many firms engaged in the oil drilling industry, based on Edmonton, go into British Columbia. Trucking firms which haul drilling rigs and pipe move from Alberta into Saskatchewan. Such industries, hitherto unrestricted by the limits now proposed, are extremely high pay organizations. No one, to my knowledge, has complained about conditions from which a labour code should be protecting them. I must say we need greater clarification of these points-some indication from the minister of what he intends to do. The oil industry is one of our best industries, one of our fastest developing industries and I personally would hesitate before approving legislation which would have a stultifying effect on it. It is a high paying industry, a boom industry, and one which is vital to the economy of this country. I do not believe in knocking it on the head.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Maybe the time is long overdue for me to make some remarks in an attempt to deal with a number of important questions which have been raised so far in our discussion. May I begin by turning to a number of specific questions which were put

to me by the hon. member for Ontario, questions which were to some extent repeated by the hon. member for Grey-Bruce today.
The hon. member for Ontario asked me how many industries had made representations to me in connection with Bill C-126. I have received a large number of delegations and read a large number of briefs, besides travelling in various parts of the country in an effort to appreciate the problems of the principal industries which have expressed concern about the application of this measure. These industries are: Trucking, railways, shipping, stevedoring, the handling of grain in elevators, fishing and feed mill operation. Other industries under federal jurisdiction have come forward but it is these, the ones I have just mentioned, which have expressed the greatest intensity of concern about the application of these provisions, especially the provision relating to hours of work.
The committee should bear in mind that a bill of this kind is bound to effect changes. If it were not intended to effect changes it would be useless. Please do not ask me not to interfere with the status quo, as was done last night, because that is the purpose of this measure. If we do not believe in making changes we ought not to have given support to this bill on second reading. I have been asked whether my amendments have been approved by the industries affected. Well, of course not, because my first obligation is to present these amendments to the committee and not to secure prior approval from industries which have a legitimate interest, in the provisions of this bill.
But I did-and the house is aware of this -issue a statement on November 5 last, in a press release, indicating in a general way what changes generally might be affected to meet the particular requirements of the trucking industry.
I believe it is safe and fair to say that, while the trucking industry, understandably, would be much happier if they were completely removed from the bill, the number, frequency and vigour of the representations have decreased since this statement was made last November. I realize that the trucking industry has special problems. The hours of work in the trucking industry are, in my opinion, excessive; they ought to be reduced for health and safety reasons and in order to meet more closely the general hours that prevail in the industry. I realize, as well, that this desirable objective ought to be undertaken with the least possible disruption of the operations of this important industry 20220-725
Canada Labour Code
and with the least possible effect on the welfare of the employees concerned.
The principal problem that makes the exercise of federal jurisdiction so difficult and necessitates a time for adjustment is the fact of divided jurisdiction. If we imposed on July 1, 1965, the standard hours of work on the trucking industry there would undoubtedly be very serious effects. Our standards are higher than the provincial standards and are higher than the standards prevailing in the United States. We would be putting the truckers under federal jurisdiction at a considerable competitive disadvantage compared with those operating under these different standards. That is part of the problem.
Another part of the problem is the irregularity of the hours. Sometimes the truckers must make long runs involving 10 or 12 hours on the road which, if the bill were strictly observed, it would be impossible to do. We have two provisions which I want to mention -there are others, of course-relating to trucking especially that can be applied to that industry and to other industries. There is the question of averaging. Clause 5 says:
Where the nature of the work In an industrial establishment necessitates irregular distribution of an employee's hours of work, the hours of work in a day and the hours of work in a week may be calculated, in such manner and in such circumstances as may be prescribed by the regulations, as an average for a period of two or more weeks.
I have stated that the "two or more weeks" comprehends a period as long as a full year. That possibility exists where there is an irregular distribution of an employee's hours of work. This would mean that through an averaging provision an employee could work 2,080 hours on the average in a year without overtime provisions coming into effect, and that an additional 416 hours would apply at overtime rates before the maximum hours in the total year would apply. This provides an opportunity for the trucking industry to average; it provides an opportunity for the grain elevators to average-and this is, in my judgment, an almost complete answer to their problems-over a period of a full year to take into account the seasonal peaks of harvest and the slack periods.
I have a good deal of evidence that I could put before the committee that supports my conclusion that the case of the grain elevators can be adequately dealt with through the system of averaging in so far as hours are concerned. The grain elevators have not complained about the other aspects of the bill. This averaging can apply to the trucking in-

Canada Labour Code
dustry. What further provisions have we made? We had the trucking industry, among other industries, in mind when we drafted the original clause 51, which provides that upon its being submitted that the immediate imposition of these hours would prejudice the welfare of the employees or the operation of the industrial establishment-and later I shall say why in my judgment it was desirable to have the minister and the governor in council do this rather than another body, subject of course to the views of the committee-the minister may defer or suspend the application of the hours of work section for a period of 18 months.
I am satisfied that the facts that have been put forward by the trucking industry are sound and that this industry would be among the most eligible for a deferment for that period. In that case we would immediately establish an inquiry under clause 35. I listened with interest to some of the proposals as to the best type of inquiry that ought to be set up, but surely the inquiry ought to be by a person or persons of independence and fairmindedness who would hear the views of employees and employers with respect to an appropriate regime of hours. After this hearing they would make their recommendations, and on the basis of those recommendations the minister would be able to recommend to the cabinet, to the governor in council, an appropriate regime of hours that would apply beyond that 18 month period. Surely this meets the problem of flexibility with respect to this industry and other industries.
The hon. member for Ontario referred to a statement which I had made suggesting that all the provinces meet with the federal government with a view to developing common standards for the trucking industry. That is the ultimate solution. If we do nothing in this industry we will never get common standards. But the ultimate solution to this problem is to work toward a system of common standards, co-operatively with the provinces, that would apply to trucking under federal and provincial jurisdiction.


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to disturb the minister in his remarks, but at this point possibly he could tell us whether since November 19 any approach has been made to the provinces to see whether they would consent to or have any plans to bring about uniformity in this field.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, obviously I am under a considerable disability in ap-

proaching the provinces without a bill having been passed. But notwithstanding that, several weeks ago the deputy minister of labour met with the provincial deputy ministers and one of the principal problems discussed was a common approach to the question of standards in the trucking industry. We have not gone beyond that. I would hope that when this bill passes we would be able to make an approach at the ministerial level, because I am satisfied that we will not make real progress unless we have a co-operative approach by the federal government and the provincial governments.
That is the general situation with respect to the trucking industry, and unless any hon. member has a question I will move on to another industry.


Mr. More:: Mr. Chairman, I listened with interest to the minister because, as he said, it was time enough for him to make some explanation regarding clause 5. In regard to the general standards it outlines, I think we all recognize they are fairly normal today except in exceptional cases. They certainly maintain the status quo and as years progress I think these standards will be changed and the hours lowered.
I think some of the excitement and exercise which the minister has shown over the present situation is his own fault. I think the members of the committee-


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, I yielded the floor to receive a question on the trucking industry. If the hon. member wants to reproach me he can do it in his own time, not in mine.


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I misunderstood the minister; I thought he had finished his explanation. However, I will ask him a question about the trucking industry. Do I correctly understand that when the bill is proclaimed, exemption will be granted to the trucking industry till an inquiry is held?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: 1 think I have gone as far as I should go in what I have already stated to the committee. It would certainly be improper for me, I think, to exercise a power or to indicate the exercise of a power which has not yet been approved by the committee.


Michael Starr: The minister said it would apply at once.


Mr. Bell:: Explain.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I beg your pardon?


Michael Starr: The minister, if I heard him correctly, said that the first deferment of 18 months would apply to the industry at once. In other words, I took it from what he said that there would not even have to be an application made on their part.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I said that the trucking industry, based on the facts I have received, would be the most eligible industry for a deferment. I think I used words to that effect, and my hon. friend should be satisfied with that.


Michael Starr: Well, we will read Hansard and see what you said.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: My hon. friend also asked about the construction industry. This bill does not apply to the construction industry, and I am sorry that my hon. friend from Edmonton wasted such a fiery eloquence on the relationship of the pipe line industry to this bill. We do not cover operations of interprovincial pipe lines or railways at all.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Or the contractors, the
builders?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: There has been some discussion about whether this bill would apply to interprovincial construction, such as pipe lines or railways, and I am satisfied that it would not apply in these instances any more than it might apply to the construction of a new bank building, telephone exchange, or facilities for any other industrial establishment under federal jurisdiction. So my legal advice is that this bill does not apply to pipe line construction.
I would draw attention to clause 3, which states that the act applies to-
-employees who are employed on or in connection with the operation of any work, undertaking or business that is within the legislative authority of the parliament of Canada-
We may be able to go into this more fully-


Gerald William Baldwin: Would the minister also refer to paragraph (i) of clause 3, which says:
-any work, undertaking or business outside the exclusive legislative authority of provincial legislatures-


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Pipe line construction is under provincial authority.
The hon. member for Pictou and the hon. member for Saint John-Albert. in addition to the hon. members for Halifax and elsewhere, have been interested in the question of longshoremen. The ports to which they referred operate for a short period of the year and the longshoremen at those ports 20220-'725*
Canada Labour Code
work hours far in excess of the standard hours. However, they work these long hours for a limited period of the year and we think there are a variety of ways by which, under the bill, we could allow this state of affairs to continue-for example, under clause 9, the special permits permitting additional hours in exceptional circumstances. Surely an operation which, because of the kind of port system which we have, is confined to a very short period in the year, is an exceptional circumstance.


Thomas Miller Bell: If the minister plans to leave that point perhaps I might ask a question which would be helpful. The minister recognizes that there is a special situation in Saint John, and I assume also Halifax, with regard to the seasonal port workers, and he gives every assurance that they are going to receive special treatment and that there will be no interim treatment of them. There are no plans to try and defer for 18 months this particular type of operation?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: No, Mr. Chairman. I have discussed the situation in Halifax with the port authority, with the trade union people, with the hon. members for Halifax and others. I have also listened to the representations of the hon. member for Saint John-Albert, and in my judgment the special circumstances applying to these ports are looked after by clause 9.


Mr. Cardiff:: I wonder whether I could ask the minister to assure me about two or three matters before this clause is passed over. The trucking industry is being affected more in some districts than others due to certain circumstances in connection with industries working in those districts. Two or three industries in my riding have complained about the labour code bill, and I should like an assurance from the minister that these particular firms will get special consideration.
I should like to tell the minister why I make this request. These firms hire key men, and have so employed these men for several years. They keep them on all winter, paying them the same money with little or no work for them to do, owing to the fact that the employers do not want to lose them. In the summertime they work harder than perhaps they should, and these people want to be assured that consideration is given in the bill to allowing them to retain these men and enable them to work longer hours in the summertime than in the wintertime, when they do very little work, as I say.

Canada Labour Code
I think that in Huron county more beans are grown than in any other section of Canada, and these people will be affected very considerably. I am speaking for the moment on behalf of Cooks Bros, and Hansell. Other firms want extra consideration and several other interprovincial firms are also affected by the bill. If the minister will assure me that these firms will get consideration regarding the men they have to hold over the winter months when there is not much work for them to do, I will take my seat.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, I would give the assurance to my hon. friend that based on the facts he has disclosed the averaging provisions of the bill would satisfy that situation fully.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: Well said.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Yesterday I was asked whether the bill applied to the municipal winter works program and to winter construction. These activities are under provincial jurisdiction and obviously are not covered by this particular bill.
The Depufy Chairman:	Shall clause 5
carry?


Gordon Minto Churchill: No.


Mr. Thomas:: Mr. Chairman, I was not in the house for a few minutes this afternoon during the time the minister was speaking. Did the minister answer the questions asked about the effects of this bill on local feed mills and grain elevators in Ontario? Will the minister now tell us under what law or statute these feed mills and elevators come within federal jurisdiction?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, I regret that I have not dealt with the question regarding feed mills, but I shall attempt to do so now.
The question was asked as to why this legislation will apply to local feed mills. This application flows from the provisions of section 45 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, which perhaps I should read into the record. It reads as follows:
For greater certainty, but not so as to restrict the generality of any declaration in the Canada Grain Act that any elevator is a work for the general advantage of Canada, it is hereby declared that all flour mills, feed mills, feed warehouses and seed cleaning mills, whether heretofore constructed or hereafter to be constructed, are and each of them is hereby declared to be works or a work for the general advantage of Canada-


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Some of the provinces will jump on that.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: This flows from section 45 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, and my hon. friend will realize also that grain elevators do come under this particular bill because they have been declared to be for the general advantage of Canada, under the Canada Grain Act. Federal labour legislation does include all works that have been declared for the general advantage of Canada.
My hon. friend has raised some problems in connection with feed mills and the hours of work provisions, which is presumably a matter of concern to the local feed mills. I have already explained the application of clause 51 and the averaging provision which apply according to their own terms. Clause 51 comes into effect when it can be demonstrated that the imposition of these hours of work will create hardship either on the operation or on the employees within the operation.
Perhaps I might draw my hon. friend's attention to another provision of the bill which provides an opportunity to defer the application of the $1.25 per hour provision for a period of 18 months, only in respect of local enterprises, and it is very restrictive for that period of time. I do hope that hon. members of this committee will not put forward the argument that after that period of time $1.25 per hour is an inappropriate wage even for feed mills in local areas of any part of Canada.


Mr. Lamberi:: Mr. Chairman, I seriously suggest to the minister that there seems to be a stretching of logic in his suggestion that a clause of the Canada Grain Act was included so as to control and regulate hours of work in the grain business. It seems the minister is using that suggestion as a peg on which to hang the theory that he has control over the hours of work in a feed mill or grain elevator. I have some doubt in this regard in so far as hours of work are concerned. I may be wrong in my interpretation of what the minister has said, but I understood him to indicate that because the grain act suggests control over marketing of grain, therefore the federal minister of labour has jurisdiction over the workers.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: That is the suggestion. Clause 3 of the bill, which is the application clause, is still open for discussion. I am sure there will be many other questions raised in respect of application, and I would think that during our discussion of that clause would be the appropriate time to ask those questions.


Norman Platt Lambert: I have advanced this argument because a moment ago the minister

attributed to me some wrong logic regarding interprovincial pipe lines. My suggestion is that interprovincial pipe lines are subject to regulation by the national energy board, and if one applies the same logic the minister has used in respect of local feed mills, having control because of the provisions of the Canada Grain Act, he could say there is also control in respect of interprovincial pipe lines through the national energy board. With the greatest respect, there is certainly a great deal of control over interprovincial pipe lines by the federal government because of the regulations of the national energy board, but not because of the application of his logic.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: The employees within the operation of a pipe line are under federal jurisdiction, but employees employed in the construction of a pipe line are under provincial jurisdiction.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: The minister should remember that the Department of Labour has undertaken the training of many of these people who are employed in interprovincial pipe lines operations.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: Mr. Chairman, earlier this afternoon I asked some specific questions relating to the application of this bill to the Canadian fishing industry, and I should like to know whether the minister is in a position to provide answers to those questions.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, I am
pleased to provide the hon. member with answers.
On October 19 the hon. member asked a question as to the coverage of this bill in respect of the fishing industry. The short answer is that the fishing industry is within the scope of the bill but, because of the terms of the bill, it will have very little significance for the fishing industry.
The constitutional position is that parliament has exclusive authority to legislate in relation to seacoast and inland fisheries under section 91 (12) of the B.N.A. Act of 1867. The expression "fisheries" must comprehend the activity of "fishing". The fishing industry is concerned with that activity and, as such, is within the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of parliament. Bill C-126 applies, by its terms, to employers and employees engaged upon or in connection with the operation of any works, undertakings or businesses within the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of parliament, and to employment therein. The bill would therefore apply to the inland and seacoast fishing industries.
Canada Labour Code
Persons employed in the operation of a fishing vessel may be employed in the capacity of seamen or fishermen, or both. As seamen, the bill would apply to them as a matter relating to navigation and shipping. I think that is clear enough. As fishermen engaged in fisheries, the bill would have application for the reasons already given.
However, the bill applies only where there is an employer and an employee, and most fishermen are engaged in a "joint adventure" by a sharing or partnership agreement, or fish on their own. Because of the sharing or joint adventure aspect, or because of the self-employment character of the situation, as far as we can determine only a small number of fishermen work for wages and would come under the provisions of this bill. The greater number of fishermen engaged in the fishing industry are excluded because of the arrangements under which they work in the industry-not as employees, but as self-employed persons or persons engaged in a joint adventure.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: I thank the minister for his reply. How will this apply to the whaling operations, for example, which are at present being established on the east coast? The men who agree to go to sea on these whalers receive a fixed rate of salary. Will this particular type of operation come under the terms of the act?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: If these persons are employees and are paid a salary, they would then come under the terms of the bill.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: In the light of what the minister has just told the committee, I must say there are some questions in my mind. My understanding is that the seamen employed on the fish packers in British Columbia receive wages or salaries and are under provincial labour certification. How did this happen? Has the minister any knowledge of this? In the light of the statement he has made and his definition of federal jurisdiction over seamen and fishermen, is it the intention that the terms of the bill will apply fully in respect of these employees operating ships on the coast of British Columbia?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: This is an interesting question which has arisen in at least one other case. It is true that persons who are under federal jurisdiction have been certified under provincial law in British Columbia. Presumably these certifications were granted before the Industrial Relations and Disputes
1I45S

Canada Labour Code
Investigation Act came into effect. I understand that even now there are certain flour mills which are under federal jurisdiction but where the employees have been certified provincially. It is a rather curious situation, but I am advised that is the case.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I think we should have this matter clarified for the record. When this bill becomes law does the minister consider that he will have at least supervisory jurisdiction and authority to ensure that the terms and conditions of employment under the provincial certification are no less favourable than the federal law requires them to be?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Yes. The law would oblige those standards to apply in those activities even though the workers were certified for labour relations purposes under provincial law.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: May I say I ask that question not for the purpose of stirring up another jurisdictional conflict but simply because I think the position should be made clear. I understand that the minister considers that the terms of this law would have to be complied with even though certain groups have been certified for bargaining purposes under provincial legislation.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: Another question comes to mind which arises out of the minister's answer to me a moment ago. The minister is quite correct when he says that the fishermen are classed as shareholders in a joint venture, but it is also equally true that under the terms of the Unemployment Insurance Act these men, in order to receive unemployment insurance payments, are classed as employees of the company purchasing the catch. In view of the minister's statement, I wonder which act will apply? Will the terms of this act or those of the Unemployment Insurance Act apply to these men?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: As my hon. friend will recall, when unemployment insurance was applied to fishermen a special status had to be created for fishermen to take this particular situation into account.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: The only question I asked last evening was with regard to some indication
from the minister as to what is work. 1 pointed out that there is no reference to that in the definition clause of the bill and that it is a matter of practical concern to employees in some segments of industry under federal jurisdiction. Can the minister give us an indication of what he has in mind in relation to the interpretation of the word "work"?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: The terms "working hours" and "to work" in clause 5 (1) are not defined in the bill, nor is there any provision for defining them by regulation. They therefore have the meaning commonly assigned to these words. We consider this to be the hours during which an employee works for an employer or, at the direction of the employer, is present and available for work at the work place. As the hon. member will have realized from my preceding statement, we consider that any attempt at definition might be more restrictive than helpful in carrying out the purposes of the legislation.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: That explanation is a very interesting one. Can the minister give us his understanding of how this will apply to air line employees whom I specifically mentioned? This is one of the areas where it has been drawn to my attention that the question of a definition of when an employee is under the direction of the employer becomes a rather important constituent in the question of the definition of work.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: The employee is at work when he is at the disposal of the employer and under his direction at the place of work.


Lucien Lamoureux: Shall clause 5 carry?


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: Six o'clock, Mr. Chairman.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. Mcllrailh:: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we will continue the consideration of this legislation and when it is finished we will take up the legislation I indicated last night.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, February 18, 1965