1966-06-10

Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, in accordance with our practice I wish to report to the house on the NATO ministerial meeting which took place this week in Brussels. Also in accordance with practice in other years and with the consent of the house I should like to table two copies in French and two copies in English of the final communique of this meeting; and if the house agrees, as it has on other occasions, I suggest that this be published as an appendix to today's Hansard.


Mr. Speaker:: Is that agreed?


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


Paul Joseph James Martin: The discussions at this meeting covered a wide range of problems, but our attention was necessarily concentrated on issues directly related to the French decision, while remaining within the alliance, to withdraw from the integrated military structure.
The nature of the main problems that we had to discuss, which were internal to the alliance, made necessary an unprecedented organization of work. The meetings on Monday, June 6, were among the foreign ministers of the 14 countries, to which the government of France had sent communications. It also proved necessary in the case of the regular ministerial meetings for the 14 ministers to hold meetings several times separately in order to work out among themselves a common position on issues under negotiation with the French. This too was an unprecedented procedural development and one which could have created difficulty. That it worked smoothly I regard as evidence of the good will of all members of the alliance. I am also encouraged to think that it reflected their genuine desire to develop forms of relationships which would make possible continuing co-operation in the future.
[DOT] (11:10 a.m.)
Never in my experience has there been a NATO meeting where the exchanges were franker, and perhaps where the problems were more difficult. This was hardly surprising. Ministers found when they reached Brussels that both among the 14 and as between the 14 and France they were divided on two important questions: the 14 had differing and strongly held views as to whether a new site should be chosen for the North Atlantic council, and previous efforts to find a formula to cover negotiations between France and the 14 over the future role of French forces in Germany had proved abortive.
These two issues of the meetings-the site of the NATO council and the negotiating procedures for French forces in Germany-involved for us a common concern. At stake in each case was the continued unity of the alliance. We avoided open breaches. Orderly procedures for examining our differences were agreed upon. Time was gained. I do not deny that we have difficult problems ahead of us. The 14 proved to themselves that they could hold to a common position, and France found that its allies were ready to compromise in order to preserve the unity of the alliance.
Now, sir, reporting on these very vital meetings, I do not want to give an exaggerated impression of the achievements of the meeting. In concrete terms we succeeded in working out a procedure for conducting negotiations on the several problems involving all members of the alliance which are posed by the French decision to withdraw from the integrated military structure. Moreover, the intensive and delicate discussions which led up to this agreement, and which lasted for two days, were marked by efforts on both sides to resist any formula which they considered might prejudice their position in the negotiations which would ensue. This confirmed what we already knew, that it will prove extremely difficult to find a way to reconcile at the same time the requirement of the 14 that French forces remaining in Germany should undertake a

June 10, 1966
External Affairs
militarily significant role, with French insistence on the principle that their forces should not be integrated.
The question at issue here is the extent of the military co-operation which the French government will be prepared to provide as a substitute for participation in the integrated military structure; for it is necessary to have a concerted planning in peace time if there is to be effective response in emergencies and concerted action in war. The outcome of these complex and crucial negotiations cannot be forecast, but they are at least fairly launched.
The other issue faced at Brussels concerned the future site of the North Atlantic council. This was the main issue which divided the 14. There were some who felt keenly that a decision had to be taken immediately to move the council from Paris. With SHAPE, the military headquarters, obliged to leave French territory, they argued the case for the co-location of the military and civil headquarters.
A decision to move the council from Paris would be an important political action. I argued; would it have been right to have taken such a step before testing French intentions; before discovering whether co-operative military arrangements could be worked out between the French and the 14 who have decided to maintain the integrated military structure; even before President de Gaulle had visited Moscow, even before the French foreign minister had reached Brussels and had a chance to show, in consultation with his colleagues, whether satisfactory arrangements could be worked out with France? How could we hope to work out such arrangements with France, the Canadian delegation argued, if our first action as the 14 was to anticipate that our negotiations with the French would fail?
These are the questions I put to my colleagues. No matter how valid some of the arguments for moving the council might be, we maintained it was too early to take a decision. Eventually, after the fullest discussion, the 14 ministers agreed to defer consideration of the question until October.
The French foreign minister later spoke in the ministerial meeting of the position taken by the 14. He said the French government would be pleased if the 14 decided that the council should remain in Paris, but if it were decided to move the council, France would understand the reasons. This statement, which is noted in the communique,

helped to clear the atmosphere. When we do approach this problem again in the autumn, President de Gaulle will have visited the Soviet union and we shall have a clearer idea of the limits of military co-operation between France and the 14. Then, in reaching our decision, facts rather than expectations can guide us.
If two of the principal achievements of the meetings emerged out of conflict, the third important element-the emphasis on improving east-west relations-developed without opposition. Here, I am pleased to report, agreement was complete. All ministers recognized the need to increase bilateral contacts with the countries of eastern Europe. They saw this as having value in itself and as a necessity for the creation of an atmosphere propitious for the negotiations which must eventually take place on the German settlement. The ministers decided that a report on the possibilities for developing east-west relations should be prepared for their future use.
This unanimity of approach was most encouraging. It demonstrated the extent to which the members of the alliance share a common political outlook, agreeing on the aims of policy and on the prospects for making progress. All members reiterated that a European settlement was our basic objective. But the road to that settlement will be long. It is the intractability of the problems, rather than any lack of will to pursue solutions, which makes progress inevitably slow.
The proof of the measure of agreement and the motives underlying it are expressed in the final communique. By the standards of earlier communiques I regard this communique as forward looking. For this reason, and because it includes the formula agreed upon to cover negotiations with France and outlines certain changes in the structure of the organization, I have already asked the house, and we have agreed to its inclusion in Hansard.
The Brussels meeting can I think be described as fruitful in the sense that a week before the meeting began it seemed that we were headed for a confrontation between France and the 14 which threatened to lead to a complete breach. But a confrontation was avoided and a sense of shared interest prevailed. All countries agreed-and this is important-that the maintenance of the Atlantic alliance is as necessary today as ever. They further confirmed that, to this end, its members are pledged, separately and jointly, by means of continuous and effective
June 10, 1S66



self help and mutual aid, to maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.
Our problems are not resolved, Mr. Speaker; indeed, the crucial issues have yet to be faced, but necessary preliminary decisions have been taken. For this we have the alliance and the NATO council machinery to thank. Once again, this time in new and in many ways more difficult circumstances, the value and the resilience of the alliance were demonstrated. We did our best to avoid unnecessary decisions which could have destroyed the alliance at this stage. We discussed many other problems, including Cyprus, but I have outlined today the essential ones because they involve the unity of the alliance. What the future holds for the 15 has yet to be determined but at any rate, as I have said, we have bought time.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Hon. members will, I know, join me in welcoming back to the house the Secretary of State for External Affairs, and will appreciate the fullness of the report he has given. This morning over the radio Ron Collister, who accompanied the minister, described him as a leader of the doves, a most unusual position for the minister to occupy.
[DOT] (11:20 a.m.)
As far as the conference is concerned it was a most important one having, as it did, the responsibility of ensuring the preservation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and doing everything possible to keep France within that organization. France outside the organization would weaken NATO to an extent that would leave it little more than a memory.
It has been argued that NATO will benefit from the division that has taken place in consequence of the intransigent attitude of President de Gaulle. I think the answer to that was given by General M. Lemnitzer when he said "One more benefit of this sort and we will be out of business."
The minister quite frankly states that the problems are not resolved, that the issues that are crucial to the maintenance of NATO have been postponed. Sometimes there are victories in the postponement of action, and in this case I think we in the western world will agree that the fact that the confrontation which had been expected has been postponed at least permits us to hope that in the
23033-395J
External Affairs
intervening months between now and October the voices of reason will assure the preservation of NATO.
The minister also mentioned the necessity of improving east-west relations. Personally I feel that the Danish proposal for an early east-west conference was a worthy one. Careful preparations will have to be made before such a meeting can take place. Furthermore, there will have to be agreement among all the nations of NATO as to the basis upon which discussions may take place. I hope such a meeting can be arranged. It will be difficult. The experience since 1945 does not lead to an optimistic expectation as to the result. However, I think we must continue to pursue every avenue toward better relations with the U.S.S.R., particularly at this time when the U.S.S.R. and communist China are having their divisions and difficulties.
We are glad to have the assurance from the minister that deferring the question of moving the council was a major decision which was taken at the meeting. Had the 14 members of NATO proceeded with the removal of the council in the fact of the attitude taken by France, in my opinion to all intents and purposes NATO would have become a matter of history. All of us can hope that after General de Gaulle's visit to Moscow he will return with new concepts regarding NATO and its preservation.
It is of interest that President Tito has stated that the days of NATO are numbered and that this conference has established that result beyond any question of doubt. I do not accept his views, and I think Canadians as a whole will not accept them. He holds out the promise that if NATO goes, the Warsaw pact countries will dissolve their organization. We believe, with those who have the responsibility of government today, that NATO must be maintained, and that if changes must be made then, based on experience which has been gained since its inception, this should be done in a spirit that will make possible those changes. NATO has not outlived its usefulness. NATO must be preserved.


Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, we too welcome the Secretary of State for External Affairs back from Brussels. We have followed his statement with keen interest. Notwithstanding the withdrawal of France from the integrated military structure, it is clearly necessary to any effective military disposition to have the co-operation of France; and if it appears that Canada has

June 10, 1966
External Affairs
played a significant role in preventing decisions which might make that co-operation impossible in the future then I believe the Secretary of State for External Affairs deserves our commendation and our thanks for taking this action on behalf of Canada. I believe Canadians generally would be averse to any course of action which would make co-operation with France more difficult.
There is, however, one aspect of this statement about which I feel very much less optimistic and less happy; that is where the minister discusses the third important element, as he calls the emphasis on improving east-west relations. He says this developed without opposition and that agreement was complete, that all ministers recognized the need to increase bilateral contacts with the countries of eastern Europe.
I do not doubt the value of bilateral contacts, but I suggest the time has come when the western alliance must be sued as a means of integrating policies of the whole alliance and moving toward the improvement of relations with the countries of eastern Europe. It is not good enough to have reliance upon bilateral arrangements to this end. After all, bilateral arrangements are bound to lead to a host of different and conflicting policies. To my mind the most important function of the alliance in the future will not be so much its military posture but whether it can transform itself into an instrument of integration of policies which eventually may lead to the dissolution of the alliance which after all is only a temporary measure to deal with a temporary situation. I am not happy if we are about to pat ourselves on the back about an agreement, if this only means that this course is to be pursued in a bilateral manner.
I noticed a guarded optimism on the part of the Secretary of State for External Affairs when he said the communique was good by past standards, or something of that sort. This indeed was very faint praise. He speaks with a degree of optimism chiefly because disaster has been averted. This is indeed better than nothing, but I want to urge upon the minister that he continue with efforts to make sure the alliance is ready to adopt not only a forward looking stance by previous standards, but a much more forward looking stance than has been the case in the past.
[DOT] (11:30 a.m.)
I should like to say that any attempt to revive the past-and there seem to be some voices within the alliance that think this is possible-will mean the destruction and end of
(Mr. Brewin.]
the alliance. It is, therefore, with the hope that there will be a genuine transformation so that instead of this being forward looking from past, negative standards, there will be a truly forward look in the future that we commend the minister for what he has so far achieved, and in that sense we hope he is going to continue to take a bold, independent and forward approach to this whole problem on behalf of Canada.


Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapointe):: Mr. Speaker, we are also happy to observe that the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Martin) is back in the house. All will admit, I think, that we missed his vast experience and his humour which are beneficial to the whole house.
It is obvious, having heard the statement of the minister, that all the problems discussed, considered and analysed by the NATO Council have not been settled by the meeting. Nothing was broken but nothing was settled. Discussions and decisions on the problems involved have been postponed, and further discussion has been made possible. That is all for the better, because if hurried decisions had been taken, they might possibly have been unfortunate.
The minister has played a major role in this meeting and I feel we ought to congratulate him for having prevented an unfortunate ending of the meeting.
Mr. Speaker, there is nevertheless, one fact that stands out in the report of the minister:	It is that the western powers
seemed to be lacking the presence of a strong man, of an experienced man capable of handling discussions with the eastern powers, and that man has turned out to be General de Gaulle, since the eyes of the western powers are now on his visit to Moscow, and everybody expects a lot to come out of it. If all the western powers expect a lot from such a visit, it is because they are confident that General de Gaulle is liable to return with concrete, positive and precise results.
The attitude of General de Gaulle may be questionable as far as NATO and the refusal of France to share in the integration of the armed forces is concerned.
Yet, we must not forget that NATO wanted to integrate everything, except the most important element of all. They wanted to integrate the military forces of 15 countries, but
June 10, 1966

only one country, the United States, would have kept control of the most important element today from the military point of view, in other words control of nuclear and atomic weapons. The other 14 countries would have given everything they had; the United States, on the other hand, would have given everything, except the most important thing of all, their atomic and nuclear weapons, which would not have been included in the integrated forces. It is not surprising that some countries did not like this attitude, particularly France, which protested.
All this leads us to believe that NATO has a new role to play. The active theatre of operations in external affairs is no longer Europe; it has shifted to another part of the world, to Asia. NATO was created in order to face any potential attack by countries of eastern Europe; on the other hand, the Warsaw Pact was intended to counterbalance NATO. The members of NATO and the Warsaw Pact must now realize that their role cannot be the same in the future. Pacts must no longer be concluded nor councils established in order to prepare for defence or war; instead, there should be councils or associations of countries working to spread peace in the world.
NATO's role must no longer be military but peaceful, because the active theatre of operations in external affairs has shifted from Europe to Asia. Therefore, I believe the role of NATO should be reviewed and reanalysed, and this is why I am glad to find that no definite decision was taken during the meeting in which the hon. minister took part.
Europe went through its own time of war; the people of Europe learned that war never brought anything pleasing, only destruction and death. Today, it seems that another part of the world has yet to find that out, and that is Asia. Well, Europe as well as America will have to see to it that decisions are taken to help those countries in Asia or Africa where fighting is going on to bring them back to peace, so that Canada will play in the world the role of pacification for which it has always been appreciated throughout the world.


Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, I join with the other party leaders in welcoming the Secretary of State for External Affairs back to the house. We have followed his activities with much interest, and I am sure all of us would say with a
Shipping
considerable degree of pride that we are pleased with the stand he has taken. Certainly I agree with what he said when he defined the major gain of this conference as that of gaining time; and if the stand he took, which was not always a popular one, was taken so that more consideration could be given to the difficult situation in which NATO finds itself due to unilateral decisions by France, I think something has been achieved. In view of the firm attitude taken by the United States and the situation which existed, I think perhaps we can best define the action taken as defensive action. We must commend the minister for his initiative in the broad, vital and important role he played. Of all the points he mentioned as being important, I think his reference to the need for agreement on and settlement of the European situation as being a common objective is the most important. The peace and stability of Europe, as related to the over-all situation brought into focus specifically by the action of France, can only be achieved on the basis of a settlement to bring the divided Germany together.
As others have already stated, what is now necessary at this stage is offensive action directed toward a redefinition of NATO and the new role it will play if it is to accomplish its objectives during this second phase of development in Europe, now that the danger of military action has eased off. I trust the minister will support this action in which he has already provided leadership, and use effectively Canada's re-established and strengthened position to define the new role for NATO, which certainly cannot be military but must be one dealing with economic and political aspects.
Let me again say that we are pleased that the minister is home. We appreciate the part he has been able to play for Canada, and in respect of his own personal leadership may we just say that his ability as an old pro politician has really shone forth in a commendable way.
[DOT] (11:40 a.m.)


SHIPPING
[Stage Direction]
On the order:
Introduction of bills: Mr. Howard-Bill intituled "An act to provide for the resumption of the loading and unloading of vessels at the ports of Montreal, Trois-Rivieres and Quebec".
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether before you call the next item of business I could say this. Inasmuch as
6240	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry this bill was given wide publicity early yesterday, thereby achieving the desired effect of spurring on all elements interested in concluding the negotiations, and to the extent of-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The Chair does not have a copy of the bill, and it certainly cannot be introduced now. Does the hon. member wish to proceed with the bill at this time?


Frank Howard: That is the point I was getting to, Mr. Speaker. Because of the desired effect so far I would ask that it stand.


Mr. Speaker:: Stand.



PRIVILEGE


[Stage Direction]
Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of National
Defence): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of personal privilege. Yesterday during my absence the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Churchill) raised a point of order regarding a clarification which I made on the blues.
Some hon. Members:: Clarification?


Mr. Hellyer:: As a former teacher my hon. friend has no doubt realized that in the original sentence in the blues the word "that" could refer to either "stone monument" or "fighting efficiency". As it did in fact refer to "fighting efficiency" I simply made a clarification so that no misunderstanding could arise.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Winnipeg South Centre):: I took the other meaning out of it, Mr. Speaker. I thought it referred to the monument in stone that the minister is having erected.



LABOUR RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, in view of the optimistic statement made by the Prime Minister yesterday regarding the possible early settlement of the stevedores' strike, would the minister now be able to say that we have come to the end of the paralysis of the government and that action is going to be taken to bring about a settlement?

DEBATES	June 10, 1966


Hon. J. R. Nicholson (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, if I remember the right hon. Prime Minister's words yesterday, he said the government was hopeful, as a result of recent developments, that a settlement would be brought about through collective bargaining in good faith with a sincere desire on the part of both parties to see an end to the dispute. When the Prime Minister made that statement he knew that negotiations had been resumed. They continued until late last night.
The issues, which were very numerous several weeks ago when Judge Lippe came into the picture-and with a great many substantial points in dispute at that time-were narrowed two or three weeks ago, and were further narrowed over the week end when I participated in the discussions to perhaps 12 or 15 points. I think I can safely say that they are now down to a maximum of about three, and the parties will be continuing the discussions at noon today.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, would the minister tell the house what are these three items on which there is disagreement?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: The negotiations are on, and I prefer to say nothing more at this time.


John George Diefenbaker: I ask the minister whether he read the editorial in the Gazette this morning to the effect that the Expo situation is very serious, and that the nations who have come to Expo at the invitation of the government of Canada are discovering that Canada has no government. What observation has he to make on that?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: I have not read the editorial in the Gazette this morning, but there seems to be nothing new in the editorial on this situation.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquillam):: supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the encouraging reports by Judge Lippe about the probability of a settlement of this strike, and in view of the importance of the mediation continuing without any interruption, may I ask the Minister of Labour whether he has received a wire from the representative of the International Longshoremen's Association, Mr. Gerard Tremblay, complaining about the fact that mediation today is being delayed because longshoremen representatives are being required to appear in court in respect of injunctions registered by the National Harbours Board
June 10, 1966

and the shipping federation. I want to ask the minister whether he is taking any steps to try to have these court hearings postponed so the mediation may proceed uninterrupted.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, in commenting on the remarks just made, because it is not a question, it is more of a statement, I would only say that I am sure the people of Canada more particularly the farmers of Quebec, felt that the action of the harbours board in taking out these injunctions was timely and necessary.
The injunction motions today arose as a matter of regular court procedure. It is my understanding that the argument is being adjourned to permit the continuation of negotiations at twelve o'clock today. I am sure no one would seriously suggest that the action of the National Harbours Board in instituting this injunction procedure at the time they did was not necessary. I hope the atmosphere is much better today-and I am sure it is-and I am very hopeful that the proceedings will continue in a more relaxed atmosphere and that we will get the results about which the Prime Minister expressed the hope yesterday.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I think the minister misunderstood me, or he probably did not catch what I said. I did not ask him to have the injunctions removed; I asked whether he was making any representations to have the hearings in court postponed so the mediation might continue uninterrupted.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: I have already said that I believe arrangements are being made to adjourn this morning's proceedings. That is my understanding.



EXPO '67 INQUIRY AS TO POSSIBLE WITHDRAWAL OF FRANCE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Qu'Appelle):: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is directed more particularly to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, relating to this strike. My question is: In view of the widespread feeling, almost panic, which is emanating from Montreal in connection with Expo, has the minister been advised in any manner whatsoever that the French are considering withdrawing their participation in Expo?
Inquiries of the Ministry Hon. Robert Winters (Minister of Trade and Commerce): Mr. Speaker, I have not experienced anything that would resemble panic, and I have been in touch with this situation on an hourly basis. There is no indication that France will withdraw from Expo. They are experiencing some difficulty in getting on with their work because of the strike, but on-site installations are proceeding normally in so far as they can.



AIRPORTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Transport.
Could he tell us if, under the restrictions to the public works program announced in the last budget, the construction of certain airports has been cancelled or postponed?


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, I could not possibly say whether some of these projects have been delayed for other reasons, but I do not think any of them have been delayed for the particular reason the hon. gentleman mentioned. However, I would have to clarify that in order to be sure.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask a supplementary question.
When checking up on this, could the minister also find out if the Bagotville airport is to be built shortly?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Very willingly, sir. BROADCASTING
INQUIRY AS TO PRODUCTION OF WHITE PAPER On the orders of the day:


Robert Norman Thompson: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Secretary of State and concerns the draft of the white paper on broadcasting which we understand is now before the cabinet. I would ask the hon. lady whether she intends to delay the publication of this white paper until she has had a report of the parliamentary committee regarding the "Seven Days" dispute.
6242	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, I have never intended to delay anything that it is my responsibility to produce as quickly as I can. I thought I had made it clear to the house over the last few weeks that we were hoping to have it produced to the public by the end of June. We are running into some technical difficulties about printing, but still think it will be produced by the end of June. I understand from press reports that the committee hopes to have its report made prior to the June meeting of the C.B.C. board.
These documents may come out on the same day, or one earlier and one later; I do not know. I do know that both the committee and the government will do everything possible to produce their documents as quickly as they can.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Minto Churchill: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence based on a B and B questionnaire now being circulated, asking servicemen to declare to which class in our society they really belong, whether military, intellectual, upper, working or middle class. My question is this. Will the information derived from this questionnaire be taken into account when promotions within the service are being considered, and should servicemen protect their interests by listing themselves as really upper class, like the minister?



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture. I preface it by saying that we all realize the large administrative problem the minister has in connection with the payment of the 75 cent milk subsidy. Can the minister give some indication to members of the house, who are receiving many letters about this, how soon the 75 cent milk subsidy payment will be made on a regular monthly basis?


Hon. J. J. Greene (Minister of Agriculture):: I am instructed the cheques have started going out, and in the ensuing months they will go out on a regular monthly basis. The cream cheques are going out quarterly to all

DEBATES	June 10, 19G6
suppliers until further statistics can be compiled with regard to cream.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs, and I hope he can remove some confusion from my mind. The London Daily Telegraph for Tuesday, June 7, when reporting the NATO meetings concerning the Paris move, quotes Mr. Howard Green as speaking for Canada. Would the minister mind informing the house if Mr. Howard Green was a member of the Canadian delegation?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I suggest that the question is not in order. Perhaps the hon. member could live with his confusion for a few more days and put his question on the order paper.



NATIONAL SECURITY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Erik Nielsen (Yukon):: Can the Prime Minister advise the house whether a decision has yet been made as to the constitution of the royal commission to inquire into security procedures, which he mentioned over two months ago?


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: No, Mr. Speaker.



AIR TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Raymond Rock (Jacques-Carlier-Lasalle):: I have a question for the Minister of Transport in reference to air safety. Can the minister advise the house whether there have been any new developments in the north Atlantic air corridors situation?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, sir.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.
June 10, 1966	COMMONS DEBATES	6243


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think, Mr. Speaker, it is-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I would be pleased to hear the minister if he can indicate that the question is of some urgency. Certainly in the way it has been asked there is nothing that makes it immediately apparent that it is urgent.


John Whitney Pickersgill: On the point of order raised by Your Honour, I might say that questions have been asked and answered repeatedly on this same subject earlier in the session. It has been considered that the question of safety was very urgent. I am happy to say that an agreement has been reached among the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada to restore the 120 mile corridors that previously existed. The decision is being announced today.


Mr. Lambert:: Why didn't you announce it properly on motions?


Mr. R. W. Prittie (Burnaby-Richmond):: The
minister referred to the fact that Canada and the United Kingdom have agreed to this. Is it not true that all nations have agreed to this situation, and it goes into effect on Sunday?


John Whitney Pickersgill: A full statement on this subject is being issued.



EFFECT ON DELIVERIES OF LONGSHOREMEN'S STRIKE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lawrence Watson (Assiniboia):: I
should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. My question is prompted by an article which appeared last night in the Ottawa Journal and referred to Mr. Greene's double vision. The report stated that as Minister of Agriculture he figures he is getting to be a bit of a westerner.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member knows he should not read newspaper articles while posing a question.


Lawrence E. Watson: I was just leading up to my question by referring to the article. I should like to ask the minister what part he is taking, as Minister of Agriculture, on behalf of the western farmers to settle the longshoremen's strike so that farmers of western Canada can get their grain delivered by July 31?


John James Greene: I can assure the hon. member that-
Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. That is a question of a very general nature and cannot be asked at this time.



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: I should like to ask the Prime Minister to inform the house what is the attitude of the government with respect to the large group of civil servants in B group. Is there to be an immediate cyclical review, or any prospect of an increase in the immediate future? This subject is being discussed quite generally.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I am going to ask the Minister of National Revenue to answer that question because he has been dealing with that subject.


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of National Revenue):: With regard to group B, I am advised the Civil Service Commission has completed the collection of data and is submitting recommendations to the Treasury Board in July. This is the normal cyclical review. Of course any adjustment will be dated back to last October. The period of time is normal in this situation.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Minto Churchill: I have a question for the Secretary of State for External Affairs. In the course of his report this morning the minister said, and I use his words, "We discussed many other problems". He was referring to the NATO conference. I ask this question. Did the minister discuss with our NATO allies the fulfilment of the government's repeated commitment to withdraw from its nuclear role? What was the response of the allies to this determined stand?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. This question also relates to general policy.


Gordon Minto Churchill: It is a legitimate and urgent question. This morning the minister did not have time to give a full report, and he said they discussed other matters.


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps the minister will want to make another statement on motions tomorrow.
6244

June 10, 1966
Inquiries of the Ministry INDIAN AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Bow River):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. Would the minister be prepared to set up a special committee now to review the grievances of Indians and their claims with regard to their standard of living and education, particularly in view of the petitions he has received recently?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I hesitate to suggest to the hon. member that the question is of a general nature, but I do not think it can be asked under present circumstances.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Perhaps I could put it more directly, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister be prepared to set up a royal commission to look into the grievances of Indians, particularly since it was suggested last session that the government might introduce legislation in this connection?


Hon. Arthur Laing (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, the commitment made in respect of a claims commission is still entirely valid. We have, however, been asked by a very important segment of the Indian population, namely the Indians of British Columbia, to consider what they term the British Columbia lands question before reintroducing legislation in respect of Indian claims. We have, at the request of these Indians, postponed the introduction of the legislation.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: May I ask a supplementary question. In view of the fact that several Indian chiefs are now maintaining there is discrimination in the educational system, particularly on religious grounds, will the minister include that question in his investigation?


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether I could ask the minister of northern affairs if he can inform the house of the status of the proposed agreement between the government of Canada and the government of Alberta relating to certain services to the native Indian people?


Arthur Laing: We think we are making progress, Mr. Speaker.



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Heward Graffiey (Brome-Missisquoi):: My question is directed to the Minister of Finance. Will the minister inform the house whether the government is now faced with an immediate and urgent problem relating to a shortage of coinage? If so, what action is proposed?


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Finance):: I do not believe a shortage of silver is likely to develop for some time to come. The decision of the United States to abandon the minting of silver coins in favour of coins made of copper and nickel has had the effect of greatly reducing the demand for silver. The treasury has indicated there is no immediate likelihood of a critical situation developing in connection with silver. It has stated its stocks of silver are sufficient for at least seven years ahead. The Canadian government has been aware for some time that Canada, like the United States, should make preparation in anticipation of any possible increase in the price of silver in the future.
For the last year the government has therefore been studying the possibility of substituting other metals for silver in our coinage.



NATIONAL PARKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the minister of northern affairs. Yesterday I asked him about a request by the minister of industry of the province of Alberta for a conference on national parks policy, and the minister indicated that he would prefer to take the question as notice and make a statement perhaps today. Is he in a position to do so now?


Arthur Laing: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member asked me whether I had had correspondence with Mr. Patrick concerning his wish for a conference on the operation of national parks. On June 7 I wrote him, advising him that I saw no merit in such a conference. I reminded him that we had announced a national parks policy which had received the endorsation of all parties in the house, and that we had received a very
June 10, 1966	COMMONS
great deal of correspondence approving the policy.
I also reminded him that in respect to general recreation in parks there is already set up a dominion-provincial group, of which his own deputy minister is a member, and that this organization is producing very good results. I made it very clear that the national parks in Canada are a national responsibility, and that we are quite content with their method of operation at the present time.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: A supplementary question. Perhaps the minister is satisfied, but is he aware of the ever increasing discontent with the administration of that parks policy?


Arthur Laing: No, sir, I am not-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The question is argumentative.


Robert Norman Thompson: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. May I ask the minister of northern affairs whether he is in favour of the parliamentary committee which deals with national parks actually holding hearings in Banff and Jasper?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. That aspect of the question is not urgent.



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. R. Southam (Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question I should like to direct to the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys in his capacity as reporting to the house for Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. The urgency of the question is based on a recent world market survey, a report on which appears in the last issue of the Financial Post, which indicated a shortage of heavy water-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Would the hon. member kindly ask his question.


Richard Russell Southam: -and indicated Canada might have the capacity to fill the market.
In view of the long delayed announcement of the location of Canada's second heavy water plant, is the minister now in a position to inform the house where the plant is to be located and when its construction will be commenced?
DEBATES	6245
Inquiries oj the Ministry


Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: Mr. Speaker, I understand that the time limit for making the announcement is June 15, which is coming up very soon now.


Richard Russell Southam: A supplementary question. Can the minister indicate whether he had any discussions with Premier Ross Thatcher in connection with the location of the plant during his recent visit to Ottawa?


Jean-Luc Pepin: No, Mr. Speaker. This matter is entirely the responsibility of Canadian General Electric.



HARBOURS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jack Davis (Coast-Capilano):: Mr. Speaker, I have an urgent question for the Minister of Transport. Could the minister say something today which would put an end to the long standing dispute between the National Harbours Board and the C.P.R. in the port of Vancouver?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to say that this long standing dispute which has delayed the development of Vancouver harbour is over, and that an agreement between the harbours board and the C.P.R. will be signed in Vancouver today. This should mark the beginning of a new era of expansion in the port of Vancouver.


Mr. Grant Deachman (Vancouver Quadra):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Can the minister inform the house whether the P & O liners which come into Vancouver, and which the C.P.R. has been refusing to permit to dock there, will now be docked with the consent of the National Harbours Board at the C.P.R. wharves which the harbours board is acquiring?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I do not think there will be any further difficulty about P & O liners or any other liners we can get to come to Vancouver.


Mr. Thomas M. Bell (Saint John-Alberf):: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Has the Minister of Transport discovered any more interest in the port of Vancouver on the part of hon. members from out there than he did when the hearings were held in Vancouver two weeks ago?
June 10, 1966

Inquiries of the Ministry


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, the interest of members from all political parties which have members in the house from Vancouver has always been very keen indeed.


Thomas Miller Bell: Is the minister aware that they failed to show up when the hearings were held in the vicinity?


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a supplementary question with regard to another dispute within the Department of Transport.
Now that he has settled the Vancouver conflict, could the minister attempt to settle the disagreement between the C.N.R. and the many owners of fish and game clubs in the Saguenay-Lac Saint-Jean area?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I will be very glad to inquire into that.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. William Dean Howe (Hamilton South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Transport. Is the minister in a position to make a statement on the annoying condition in Hamilton created by the Canadian National Railways shunting cars at night in a residential area, about which we have had correspondence?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. That question should be put on the order paper.



PUBLIC WORKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (Queens-Lunenburg):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. To indicate the urgency of the question I wish to state that I have a question, No. 1,584, on the order paper relative to this matter, but to date I have not received a reply to it.
My question is as follows. In view of the serious impact upon the citizens and the shipbuilding industry at Dayspring, Nova

Scotia, caused by the recent banning of the use of the public wharf in the area by the Department of Public Works, will the minister indicate when it is his department's intention to carry out the repairs required to this much used public structure so the lives of the shipbuilders and fishermen will not be endangered when using this facility?
Hon. G. J. Mcllraiih (Minister of Public
Works): Mr. Speaker, I should like to take that question as notice and bring forward an answer on Monday.



WATER RESOURCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a question to the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys. My question is of national importance in view of the country-wide interest in our water policy.
I would ask the minister whether he can inform the house if the government of Canada has made available a grant of $164,000 in order that Professor Kuiper of the University of Manitoba can undertake a study related to the export of Canadian water based on lake Winnipeg.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I suggest that the question should be placed on the order paper.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Roland Godin (Porineuf):: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to put a question to the Minister of Forestry and rural development but, in his absence, I will direct it to the Prime Minister.
Is it the intention of the government to grant a supplementary subsidy to Quebec farmers in order to fill the gap between the actual price of feed grain stored in elevators paralysed by the strike and the price they must pay for grain they have to order from Fort William and which is conveyed by railway?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I will have to take that question as notice.
June 10, 1966

Inquiries of the Ministry [Translation]	anything additional with respect to these
CANADIAN BROADCASTING	programs.



CORPORATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Auguste Choquette (Lotbiniere):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put my question to the Secretary of State.
Since the recent participation of the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey) on the broadcast "Les affaires de l'Etat" constituted an obvious breach of section 17 of the Broadcasting Act, could the minister inform the house whether disciplinary measures or some kind of action has been taken against the C.B.C.?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. This question was declared out of order yesterday when the hon. member put it.



CANADIAN CENTENNIAL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. K. H. More (Regina City):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State. In view of the critical situation that has developed in regard to the provincial centennial building programs and the provision of grants for auditoria owing to the highly escalating cost which have been found when tenders have been submitted, has the government reconsidered the basis of its grants program and will there be an announcement made shortly which will enable the provinces to carry forward their projects to completion?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Mr. Speaker, under the government grant program $2,500,000 per province was granted by the federal government. It was then up to the province to decide what it wanted to do with that amount and what kind of structure to build. As a minimum the province could restrict itself to the federal government grant in deciding what was going to be built or it could go up to, say, $5 million and contribute equally with the federal government. In fact, the building programs of most of the provinces have gone over the minimum figure. The federal government has been requisitioned to provide $2,500,000 in each case. It is not anticipated that there will be


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I agree with what the minister has said. I am sure she knows that when these projects were designed they were within the $5 million range, but because of escalating costs-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member is engaging in argument.


Kenneth Hamill (Ken) More: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Secretary of State. In view of the fact that the government has accepted the responsibility of paying $32 million for the $18 million complex that we shall have in this city, does the minister not think that the government ought to consider increasing the grants to other bodies which find themselves in a similar position with respect to programs that were instigated by the government?


Mr. Speaker:: Order please. This question is argumentative.


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Mr. Speaker___


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The question has been ruled out of order.



COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert Norman Thompson: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Has Canada clarified its position regarding the postponement of the regular meeting of the commonwealth prime ministers to September in light of the present meeting of high commissioners now being held in London? Perhaps I could direct that question to the Prime Minister.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, this matter is still under consideration and will of course have to be settled within the next few days. There has been no decision reached yet whether the conference will take place in July or whether it wifi be postponed until September. That decision will be taken within the next few days.

June 10, 1966
Inquiries of the Ministry GRAIN



EFFECT ON EXPORT MOVEMENT OF LONGSHOREMEN'S STRIKE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. George Muir (Lisgar):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. Is the minister now prepared to give me the figures respecting the tie-up of grain and ships involved in the three ports struck by the longshoremen?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I promised to get this answer. Fifty four ocean vessels and 23 lakers are involved. I think the approximate quantity of grain is around 35 million bushels.


George Robson Muir: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of this very serious situation, which is now affecting farm deliveries to local elevators on the prairies, does the minister not think it is high time that this grain was moving overseas?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Robert McCleave (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Associate Minister of National Defence. Has a decision yet been reached in the matter of re-enlistment bonuses for those who were formerly in the armed services?


Hon. Leo Cadieux (Associaie Minister of National Defence):: Not yet, Mr. Speaker.



ACTION TO BE TAKEN FOLLOWING ASSISTANCE REPORT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. In view of the understandable concern in Nova Scotia, particularly in Cape Breton Island, regarding the recommendations of Dr. Ritchie Donald, can the minister not tell the house how soon it will be possible for the government to release the information regarding these recommendations and what action the government intends taking on them?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I have the impression that this question has been asked a number of times during the last few weeks. If any new aspect of the matter has been raised by the hon. member, perhaps the minister might want to answer.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I ought to say by way of general explanation that this was not an inquiry or a royal commission or anything of that kind. Dr. Donald was engaged by the government to make a report to assist the officials of the government in trying to understand the situation. It is not clear even yet whether this report should in fact be released for general use. I think it probably will be, but we should like to study it very carefully before we reach any decision because the report is not necessarily going to be the basis for government action.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the stories which have appeared in maritime papers, purporting to say what the recommendations are and causing widespread concern, would the minister not make some statement fairly soon either to the effect that these statements are inaccurate or setting out the true state of affairs?


Mitchell William Sharp: I have read in the newspapers stories of this kind about many subjects. There has been a story recently about our broadcasting policy. Nevertheless I think we have to await the announcement of government policy in all these matters.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: Is there any truth in the suggestion made by the present Liberal leader in Nova Scotia, Mr. Regan, that the government is going to consider setting up a crown corporation to operate the DOSCO coal mines in Cape Breton?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I do not believe the question is so urgent that it should be asked at this time.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS QUEBEC-PETITION RESPECTING CHANGE IN PROVINCIAL CONSTITUTION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Righf Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of ihe Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I have asked the Prime Minister this question a couple of times and he has said he would look into it. It concerns the petition that was sent to the
June 10, 1966
[Stage Direction]
parliament of the United Kingdom by the legislative assembly of Quebec asking for an amendment to the constitution regarding the powers of the legislative council of Quebec. Now that there is a prospective change in the premiership of that province, would the Prime Minister say whether the government is going to suggest to the parliament of the United Kingdom that there should be no proceedings taken in reference to the petition until the views of the new government of the province have been ascertained?
Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, there is no danger of the United Kingdom government proceeding in this matter until there has been an opportunity to obtain the views of the incoming government in question.



NATIONAL ARTS CENTRE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Thursday, June 9, consideration in committee of Bill No. C-194, to establish a corporation for the administration of the National Arts Centre-Miss LaMarsh-Mr. Batten in the chair.
The Chairman:: When the committee was considering this bill on Thursday, June 9, under consideration was clause 3 of the bill with the amendment proposed thereto by the hon. member for Levis.


Mr. Starr:: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Chairman. In perusing the amendment proposed yesterday by the hon. member for Levis I have noted that the amendment was ruled in order by yourself, sir, but on careful scrutiny it is difficult to understand it. The hon. member for Levis said, as reported at page 6628 of Hansard:
I suggest to add at the end of line 2 of section 3: "That the bilingual character be recognized by the corporation in such appointments".
If Your Honour will look at clause 3 it is apparent what the difficulty is. I do not understand how fitting in this amendment at the end of line 2 would make any sense. I would ask Your Honour to look at this matter closely to see, in view of what I have brought to your attention, whether the amendment is in order.
[DOT] (12:20 p.m.)


Mr. Guay:: Mr. Chairman, I took a second look at the amendment I suggested last night. With the consent of the house, I am prepared
National Arts Centre
to withdraw it and move another one on section 4, which would no doubt be agreeable to most hon. members.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Chairman, before the amendment is withdrawn or unanimous consent is given therefor, we would want the hon. member for Levis to inform us of the nature of the amendment he intends to move to section 4.
It is all very well for him to say that he will move an amendment, but I think the house should be informed of the subject matter.


Gordon Minto Churchill: On a point of order, I think it is not a question of withdrawing the amendment. My hon. friend from Ontario has pointed out that the amendment simply does not make sense. I think the ruling of the Chair yesterday might be rescinded and the amendment declared out of order.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. After reading the amendment of the hon. member for Levis in Hansard today, I fully agree with the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Churchill) that it makes no sense. As reported at page 6628, right column, of yesterday's Hansard, the hon. member suggested to add at the end of line 2 of section 3, the following words:
That the bilingual character be recognized by the corporation in such appointments.
What does it mean? The bilingual character of what? The first two lines of section 3 read as follows:
A corporation is hereby established to be known as the National Arts Centre Corporation-
Then would be added:
That the bilingual character be recognized by the corporation in such appointments.
The rest would remain the same:
consisting of a Board of Trustees composed of a Chairman, a Vice Chairman-
Well, Mr. Chairman, if one reads the whole thing together, it makes no sense. I think the hon. member for Levis did not look at the wording of section 3 before suggesting his amendment; otherwise, he would not have suggested to amend line 2 of section 3 but line 2 of the last paragraph of section 3.
He is now asking unanimous consent to withdraw this amendment, but he had moved

June 10, 1966
National Arts Centre
another one yesterday, as reported at page 6227, right-hand column, of Hansard. It read as follows:
That the Board of Trustees be composed so as to reflect the cultural duality of this country.
Well, some sort of explanation is needed in all that, and I think that before he withdraws his amendment, the hon. member for Levis should inform the house of the subject matter of his new amendment.


Herman Maxwell Batten: The Chair is of the opinion that the point of order raised by the hon. member for Ontario is well taken. Since ruling that this amendment was in order last evening I have had the opportunity of reading it carefully and I believe the suggestion of the hon. member for Ontario that it is not viable is quite correct. Is the hon. member for Levis asking for unanimous consent to withdraw his amendment?


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Chairman, if you allow me to say so, the ruling was perhaps not quite proper. I wanted to point out that, as reported on page 6228, second column, of yesterday's official report, the Chairman said at a certain time:
The amendment moved by the hon. member for Levis is considered to be in order.
I rose then and said, as reported on the same page:
Mr. Chairman, before you give your decision, may I be allowed to say a word-
And the Chairman went on:
Order, the Chair has already given its decision that the amendment is in order.
Mr. Chairman, I only wished to point out that I was ready to throw some light on the matter. If we could have dealt with the admissibility of the amendment last night, we might not have this confusing situation today.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Does the committee give the hon. member for Levis unanimous consent to withdraw his amendment?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Amendment withdrawn.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
On clause 4-Appointment of chairman and
vice chairman.
Raynald Joseph Albert Guay: With reference to my earlier remarks, I should like that clause 4 of Bill C-194 be amended by adding paragraph 5 as follows:
In the appointment of members and officers of the corporation, due account will be taken of the linguistic duality of Canada and its cultural plurality.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Chairman, I think members in every corner of the house recognize the importance of this amendment. As one who represents a riding whose constituents are 35 per cent English speaking and 65 per cent French speaking I should like to speak to this amendment in a bipartisan way because I think we are touching upon an important subject.
I for one was most impressed by the speech made by my hon. friend from Ontario last night. I am speaking about the administration which 1 supported as well as of the present administration when I say that perhaps we did not do well enough in the past in recognizing the situation to which the hon. member for Levis has alluded today.
[DOT] (12:30 p.m.)

I entirely agree that some progress should be made in this field, but I wonder whether it is advisable to word an amendment such as the one moved today.
[English1
I simply say this: I for one trust the present government to recognize the spirit of bilingualism without actually putting into this bill a written amendment giving direction to the commission. I think the administration which I supported when we were on the other side of the house was making progress in this regard. But in the light of the speech made last night by the hon. member for Ontario I sincerely feel it would not be in the interest of national unity in the real sense of that phrase to alter the legislation by a written amendment at the present time.

Mr. Chairman, this is a very sensitive matter, and I am speaking today on behalf of my fellow-citizens of both official languages of the country.
[English1
I repeat: I do not think the government needs such an amendment in order to show its good faith in recognizing bilingualism and
June 10, 1968

the two basic facts of this nation. When we formed the government we too were making progress in that direction. In the true spirit of national unity I appeal to the hon. member to withdraw his amendment. I think he understands the spirit in which I am appealing.
Canada is going through a very difficult period. We all recognize this, but I repeat again that the government has made great progress in recognizing the two basic facts of this nation and that when we were in power we were also making progress in that direction. We did not do well enough in the past but I do not think the type of amendment which the hon. member has proposed today helps this cause.
I speak as a representative of a constituency that exemplifies the two facts in this nation. I make an appeal for common sense. This is a bipartisan issue. We are all attempting in our own ways to unite this country. I am sure the mover of the amendment was sincere in his desire, but I differ with him in the method he chooses to attain the desired result.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Chairman, may I, with unanimous consent, move that you rise, report progress and request leave to sit again later this day in order that I may make an explanatory statement on a matter of some emergency?


Herman Maxwell Batten: Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the said motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Progress reported.



LABOUR RELATIONS


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, in answer to a question this morning I stated it was my understanding that arrangements were being made to adjourn the motions for the continuation of the injunction or injunctions that have been obtained by the National Harbours Board in order to permit the movement of grain to farmers in Quebec. I have just recently received information that those arrangements did not materialize and the motions to continue the injunctions, which might have expired this morning, are now being argued. However, I am confident that the mediation before Judge Lippe will proceed when the
National Arts Centre
formal injunction hearings have been completed, though not at twelve o'clock as hoped, but a little later.
I wish to thank the house leaders for their unanimous consent to the interruption of the proceedings in committee.



NATIONAL ARTS CENTRE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration in committee of Bill No. C-194, to establish a corporation for the administration of the National Arts Centre-Miss LaMarsh-Mr. Batten in the chair.
On clause 4-Appointment of chairman and vice chairman.
1Translation1
Mr. Caron:: Mr. Chairman, I remember having moved a similar amendment some time ago on Bill S-2, so that the bilingual nature of Canada could be recognized.
Today, the hon. member for Levis (Mr. Guay) moves a similar amendment and every time an amendment of this nature is introduced, there are always members such as the previous speaker to say: Why place such things on our statutes?
Well, it is always time to do something intelligent. We have not had these things in our statutes in the past. At the present time, we hardly have 12 per cent French Canadians sitting on commissions. It is time for us to make a change.
What does it disturb if we have something definite on our statutes? All I ask is that we do not forget it and that, when they are preparing legislation, our ministers will not forget in the future to write it down, so that we do not have to do it through an amendment.
Every time legislation is being drafted, this is forgotten. Nobody thinks about it. Well, it is time to stop and think about it, and I feel this is one way to make sure that it is not forgotten. So, I am in favour of the new amendment the hon. member for Levis has just moved.
Some people talk about the immigrants coming into Canada; they say we ought to respect their language and their culture. I know that those who come to Canada, whether Poles, Italians, Germans, wherever they come from, whatever they are, know that by coming to Canada, they will have to learn at

June 10. 1966
National Arts Centre
least one of the official languages of Canada, either English or French. The majority of those immigrants learns English, which is their right. I recognize that and I accept it.
However, when they come here, they cannot ask that the Treaty of Paris of 1763 be amended and that everything done since then be abolished. There are two official languages in our country, only two, French and English. I have no objection if they keep the ways and customs of their country in Canada; I feel that every people should keep its customs. I believe that a Ukrainian, for instance, who comes to Canada, must be free to spread his original culture, dances, songs, paintings, and everything concerning his culture. This must be continued. It should be the same for Germans, Italians, etc. I am the happiest man in the world because Canada can enjoy all the cultures brought here from all parts of the world. But let us keep in mind that we have two official languages-and this was recognized by the Treaty of Paris in 1763-and this is what we want to be respected. This is reason why we stand up today and ask that the amendment moved by the hon. member for Levis be accepted.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a last comment. I entirely agree with what my hon. colleague has just said. On the other hand, I ask myself the following question: "Could we achieve national unity through a written document?" I believe that national unity must be ingrained in the mind of people as it is in the mind of each member on both sides of the house.
We cannot achieve national unity through a written legislation, but the members must set their heart on achieving it and this is what I am asking today.
An amendment such as the one proposed today would, in my opinion, and I am sincere, jeopardize national unity.
[DOT] (12:40 p.m.)


Gilles Grégoire: Would the hon. member allow me a question?


William Heward Grafftey: Yes.


Gilles Grégoire: The member for Brome-Missisquoi suggested that Canadian unity should be ingrained in the minds. May I ask him what will happen in the case of narrow minds?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Chairman, I am the first member to admit that we have not made enough progress in that direction.

The member for Hull (Mr. Caron) talked about that a few minutes ago. I entirely agree with him. But once again, I trust the present government, as I trusted our government when it was in power, and I repeat that national unity cannot be achieved by a written amendment. It must be ingrained in the mind of hon. members.
lEnglishl


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, this is an amendment that is dangerous to Canada and to Canadians. It will divide Canadians on the basis of race, and to do so would be a retrograde step. Let us examine the amendment. It reads:
In the appointment of members and officers of the corporation, due account will be taken of the linguistic duality of Canada and its cultural plurality.
What are we going to do? Are we going to look at the census, find out the number of Canadians of various racial origins in the plurality of Canadian citizenship and determine appointments on that basis? If, in setting up a cultural organization, we are going to deny every principle of a united Canada, I find it difficult to keep within the exercise of reasonable language. I do hope that members in all parts of the house will have regard to the meaning of this amendment. As I mention this I recall my first speech in this house, and one's maiden speech always is something to be remembered. I put forward the standard then, in the early days of war, that we as Canadians, without regard to origin, had responsibilities and rights. What does this mean? There are now 20 million Canadians. Let me give an example. I do not have the statistics before me but I believe there are a million people of German or Dutch origin in this country. They have been Canadians through the years. They were the earliest of Canadians, which is often forgotten. Much of what is now the province of Nova Scotia, including Lunenburg and the surrounding area, was settled by those of German origin.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: In 1753.


John George Diefenbaker: Yes, in 1753.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Do not overlook Newfoundland.


John George Diefenbaker: Yes. The Minister of Transport has added a further reference. Many of these people came to Canada as United Empire Loyalists. If you take the number of those of German origin out of the loyalists who came to Canada and who gave
June 10, 1966

up their all when the 13 colonies separated themselves from the British Crown, there would not be a very large number left, because most of those of English, Irish and Scottish origin in the 13 colonies decided to stay there.
Are we now going to incorporate as part of Canadian citizenship that, in the making of appointments, we are going to start to count heads in this country according to racial origin?


Some hon. Members:: No, no.


John George Diefenbaker: What does this mean? It means a division in Canada which we have not had before, and it is a natural growth of what has been happening in the last few years in this nation. I am not here to advertise any organization, but an organization has been set up. I understand that two members of parliament on the government side of the house have been giving strong support to an association which has been set up. It is a nation-wide organization dedicated to the ideal that there be equal rights and obligations for each and every Canadian and that this is one Canada, one nation and one people. In the course of the letter that was sent to me by a member of this house there is the following:
We Canadians, who want to see one Canada, one nation and one people, we Canadians who do not want the country divided into first, second and third class citizens-
It points out there are six million people in Canada of racial origins other than English or French.
Up to now we have not said much; we have not demanded that a certain number of "ethnic" Canadians should be ministers of the government, or judges or senior officials for we were happy to see the best man appointed to the job, regardless of his race, but if now the situation is going to change, we have to organize our efforts to ensure a proper future for our Canadians. We have to have strength, we have to have power and above all we have to be united. Without unity and political power, we are nothing. In fact, we are less than nothing and we shall remain always "foreigners".
Those associated with that organization in an attempt to build one Canada naturally will not be subjected to criticism, but if in Canada we are going to follow the suggestion that racial origin shall be a determinant in appointments, then Canada will be bifurcated. I cannot begin to describe the division which will take place.
I believe in one Canada. I believe there must not be, as has been developing in this nation, first and second class citizens. That
National Arts Centre
has been the trend as a result of all the discussion about associated states and a nation within a nation. I do hope that hon. members will not support an amendment, whatever its origin, which is going to plant in the statute books of this nation a declaration that appointments shall have regard to racial origin. If we do that, unity no longer is possible. We would be building up forces in every part of Canada that would bring about not unity but disintegration.
I am going to say nothing more except that I regard this amendment as one which could be designed only to placate and to please but which, in its essence, is destructive of everything for which Canadianism stands. Repetition does not make an argument any more effective, but I plead with the members of this house, wherever they sit, not to accept this principle, for to do so would be to have every group and racial origin in this country asking for representation in appointments.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.
[Translation1


Mr. Marchand:: Mr. Chairman, this debate had previously started on consideration of Bill S-2, although at that time it took another turn, that is to say the proposed amendment to Bill S-2 was different from the one now before the house in this sense that it asked for French Canadian representation on the commission concerned.
I remember that, at that time, I strongly objected, because the proposed amendment dealt with the question of race since it asked for representation which would not take into account the bilingual character of Canada, but the racial origin of the representatives. If we had before us the amendment, as it had been moved, then I think that the speech of the right hon. Leader of the Opposition would be justified. But the amendment under consideration is not of the same character and I think that we are wrong to discuss it as if it were an amendment with racist overtones.
And now, Mr. Chairman, I must say that personally I would prefer not to see any such provision in legislation. There are other ways besides legislation in a democracy to get fair representation. Thus traditions are created within any democratic organization. Why, for instance, is a member of Jewish origin elected in Montreal? It is not under an article of the constitution or some legal provision, but because he belongs to a rather representative group and he is accepted by the people, not because of any legal obligation but out of

June 10. 1966
National Arts Centre
respect for that group which is part of our population.
Why, for instance, in the labour field, is there an Industrial Relations Act which says that the workers must be represented? Of course, nothing forces the government to ask the Canadian Labour Congress of the Confederation of National Trade Unions to appoint a representative. The legislation only says that the workers must be represented. However, a government which, in those circumstances, appointed people who did not come from the ranks of organized labour would be disregarding democracy.
Let us say, therefore, that such is my way of thinking. Besides, speaking formally, the province of Quebec could very well decide one day not to send any French speaking member to Ottawa. Look at the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey) whose mother tongue is not French; that could happen in every constituency.
[DOT] (12:50 p.m.)
Nevertheless, we think that people, except in special circumstances, are represented by people from their own environment and that is the normal process of environmental representation. When the problem is raised-and 1 revert to my second point-that is to say when there is an infringement of the fundamental principles, when the facts or the representative factor of the groups are not taken into account, it happens that people ask what is being asked today, namely that something be written into the legislation to enable them to achieve what could not be achieved by normal democratic process. That is the reason we have such an amendment before us this afternoon.
Now, as I say, I would have preferred it not be moved, but since it has been, I find it would be most difficult for the house to object. Why? Because in spite of what the hon. member for Ontario (Mr. Starr) and the right hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefenbaker) said, when we refer to linguistic duality, in legislation or in a statement, there are no racist connotations. That is not true. I feel that the Ukrainian person who adopts the French language in Canada-and there must be a few of them-has the same rights as the Ukrainian who adopts the English language; the Pole who adopts the French language in Canada must have the same rights as the Pole who adopts the English language. That is the plane where we are concerned with equality. Not on the racial plane.
[Mr. Marchand.i
If, in the past, the hon. member for Ontario had taken up the French language instead of the English language, I think that as a Canadian he would have been entitled to demand respect for his chosen language.
That is why I say that when a racist connotation is implied in this amendment, I think it is being misinterpreted. If it had been suggested that French Canadians be appointed, I would have been the first to object, just as I have objected the last time.
In any case, in Canada where there are two official languages and not 50, if it is said that there is a linguistic duality, well if this is not true in 1966, I wonder what is. And when respect for the cultural plurality of Canada is being demanded, what can be considered scandalous in that?
[English1


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, perhaps the hon. minister would permit a question. He is dealing with only one phase. Perhaps he could explain the meaning of the words "and its cultural plurality"?


Jean Marchand: I was just about to refer to that matter.
[Translation!
There is no doubt, Mr. Chairman, that there are many cultures in Canada, that there are various cultures to be rediscovered here. There is the French culture, the English culture, and also a Ukrainian culture which has developed and is still growing. We can thus say that Canada is endowed with a plurality of cultures.
So, when it is proposed to set up a body entrusting it with the promotion of the cultural assets of the country, what is so shocking about saying: Canada is a country of many cultures? I am not speaking here of ethnic plurality, but rather of cultural plurality. The two differ greatly.
I can understand opposition stemming from a dislike to that type of provision. But I feel that taking this type of amendment and attempting to see in it connotations of racial discrimination does not help anyone in Canada.
In its present form, the amendment contains nothing of a racial nature.
Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I just want to say that, personally, I would have preferred this amendment not to be presented to the house, but since it is before the house, I do not see how I can be against it and I shall
June 10. 1966

vote for it because, as there are real grievances in this field, it would mean that the house does not heed these grievances but rejects them altogether.
Therefore, I shall vote for the amendment, although personally I wish it had never been presented.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Chairman, I have an honest question for the minister.
Since he is representing here in Ottawa the quiet revolution, could he not stand up for the French fact at the cabinet level without such an amendment being incorporated in a piece of legislation? I am convinced that the minister is very able to stand up for the French fact here in Ottawa and does not need the incorporation of an amendment into an act to do it.


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, I think I need not answer. I have made my preference known. In my opinion, a well-organized democratic country where the various values are taken into account has no need for such a provision to be included in its statutes. But since certain groups feel they cannot be protected otherwise, I understand their point of view. I realize it is a delicate matter to object to such an amendment when it is before the house.
I would object if it had racial overtones, but I do not believe it has. I think it is simply a provision which we would rather have done without. But since it is before the house, I shall support it.
1English1


Mr. Lewis:: Mr. Chairman, I rise to say a few words on this amendment as a Canadian whose origin is neither French nor English.


Mr. Mcllraith:: Mr. Chairman, if the hon. member will permit me, I should like to rise on what may be termed a point of order. May I suggest that we suspend the sittings for an hour for a luncheon adjournment.


Mr. Knowles:: Let us make it an hour and a half.


Michael Starr: No, one hour only.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Let us adjourn until 2.30.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, there appears to be concurrence at least in the idea that we suspend the sittings for a luncheon period but there is some uncertainty as to whether it should be for an hour or an hour and a half.
National Arts Centre


David Lewis: Mr. Chairman, what I have in mind is personal, but I shall be frank with the minister who interrupted me and members of this committee. There are some children from a school in my constituency with whom I have an appointment at two and I would appreciate it, since the minister interrupted me, if the adjournment was until 2.30 so that I could keep this appointment and be back in the house at that time.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, in view of that request I am very happy to agree to the suggestion that we suspend our sittings until 2.30 p.m.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Order, please. Shall I rise and report progress? Agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Progress reported.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it agreed that the sitting be suspended until-


Stanley Howard Knowles: Two thirty.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: -and that I do now
leave the chair?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
At 1.04 p.m the sitting was suspended.



SITTING RESUMED

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed at 2.30 p.m.


[Stage Direction]
On the order:
House again in committee of the whole on Bill No. C-194, an act to establish a corporation for the administration of the National Arts Centre-the Secretary of State.
Michael Starr: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the amendment that has been proposed today by a member of the government party, I find it difficult to understand how the members of the cabinet can support an amendment which differs from the principle of the bill as first approved by the cabinet. I suggest, therefore, that the Prime Minister consider standing clause 4 and proceeding with the other clauses. Then the bill might be allowed to stand until the first of the week so that we could go on with other business.

June 10, 1966
National Arts Centre


Mr. Depuly Speaker:: I think the discussion oi this matter should take place in the committee.
The house resumed consideration in committee of Bill No. C-194, to establish a corporation for the administration of the National Arts Centre-Miss LaMarsh-Mr. Batten in the chair.
On clause 4-Appointment of chairman and vice chairman.


Michael Starr: May I raise a point of order, Mr. Chairman? I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether he would not consider allowing clause 4 to stand, then deal with the other clauses of the bill and allow the bill to stand until next week?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, I hope, in view of what the hon. member has said, we will never reach a position in this house when any member of the house, wherever he sits, will not be in a position to move an amendment to any bill, and a minister of the crown will not be in a position to consider that amendment as he sees fit. However, that may be, it has been suggested, because of the significance of this particular amendment, that it would be desirable to proceed with the other clauses of the bill and come back to this one later, perhaps next week. We could proceed with other items on the agenda such as the Company of Young Canadians. I am quite agreeable to the course suggested by my hon. friend.


Michael Starr: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman. A moment ago the Prime Minister said I was objecting to a private member having the right to move an amendment. All I pointed out, as a matter of curiosity so far as I am concerned, was that I did not understand how cabinet ministers who had approved a bill could come into the house and support an amendment whose effect is the opposite of what they approved.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I hope cabinet ministers will be able to approve, if they see fit, even amendments that may be moved from the other side from time to time.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Is it agreed that clause 4 shall stand and the committee shall proceed to clause 5?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Clause stands.
Clauses 5 to 8 inclusive agreed to.

On clause 9-Objects of corporation.


Robert William Prittie: I have just one question on paragraph (b). There is a reference to encouraging and assisting in the development of performing arts companies resident at the centre. I know that an office has already been established to do certain preliminary work in connection with the centre. Is it the intention to establish theatre companies, I presume one in English and one in French, to be located in Ottawa or is it the intention to bring companies such as Stratford or Le Theatre du Nouveau Monde to Ottawa? Are companies permanently resident in Ottawa going to be established?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I cannot say what the trustees will do when appointed since no one has been approached to be a member of the board of trustees. I pointed out in my first remarks that these decisions are to be left to the board of trustees. I understand some discussions have taken place with the two companies mentioned. I imagine that from time to time the trustees will see what is developing in Canada. I would think that if possible this would be true not only of theatre groups but musical groups, ballet, cpera and a symphony orchestra.


Robert William Prittie: In the bill the corporation is being charged with establishing resident companies in Ottawa?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Yes, in the beginning it may very well be that some companies already established and without a home of their own would become resident companies in the national capital.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
[DOT] (2:40 p.m.)
Clauses 10 to 17 inclusive agreed to.
Herman Maxwell Batten: Order. With clause 4, clause 1 and the title of the bill standing, shall I rise, report progress and request leave to sit again at the next sitting of the house?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Progress reported.



COMPANY OF YOUNG CANADIANS


Lester Bowles Pearson: the second reading of the Bill No. C-174, to provide for the establishment of The Company of Young Canadians.
June 10. 1966

He said: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opportunity of moving the second reading of Bill No. C-174, an act to provide for the establishment of The Company of Young Canadians. This bill and the exciting adventure which the bill, if it is acceptable to parliament, will make possible is of great interest I am sure to all members of the house, as it is to me, as one step forward in the battle against poverty, disease, deprivation and inequality wherever these may exist in our country, as well as being a modest measure of assistance in meeting these problems in other countries.
The Company of Young Canadians represents the kind of constructive adventure in which I think we would all be glad to see our younger people, and perhaps some not so young, involved. In this respect the Secretary General of the United Nations, U Thant, expressed the other day the hope which I am sure many of us share. He said:
I am looking forward to the time when the average young person-and parent or employer- will consider that one or two years of work for the cause of development either in a far away country or in a depressed area of his own community is a normal part of one's education.
The Company of Young Canadians will, I believe, continue a good Canadian tradition reaching back to the Jesuit missions of New France right on down to the Grenfell medical outposts of Labrador and the bush-camp classrooms of frontier colleges. Its members will also serve in due course, if this legislation is approved, in villages and towns over the seas, in far away developing countries where already volunteers from the Canadian University Service Overseas-CUSO-are working and working with dedication and effectiveness. I hope that this company will be inspired by the same sense of high adventure and unselfish service as are the CUSO volunteers. For it is my hope, a hope which I am sure the house shares, that The Company of Young Canadians will have a useful, exciting and innovating role to perform in our national and in our international life.
The first reference to a Company of Young Canadians, as hon. members may recall, was made in the Speech from the Throne on April 5, 1965, a little more than a year ago, when there was this sentence in the speech:
You will be asked to approve the establishment of a Company of Young Canadians, through which the talents and energies of youth can be enlisted in projects for social development, both in Canada and abroad.
Company of Young Canadians
To ensure that plans for the company would reflect both the aspirations of young Canadians and the very real needs which the company might seek to meet in Canada and the developing countries, an organizing committee was appointed about a year ago to look into the idea and to formulate recommendations for the consideration of the government on which the government might be able to base legislation for submission to parliament.
Heading this organizing committee was a distinguished Canadian, Dr. Francis Leddy, now president of the University of Windsor, who had played an important role with Canadian University Service Overseas and World University Service of Canada, a man well equipped to be chairman of a committee to advise the government on a matter of this kind. We are grateful to him and to the members of his committee for the useful and unselfish service which they gave in the work which was transmitted to them.
The committee sought opinions from representatives of federal government departments, provincial governments, universities, voluntary agencies, youth groups and a number of private citizens. As a result of these consultations and discussions a report of the committee was submitted to the government last November.
Following a review of the recommendations of the committee and pending parliamentary consideration and action, the government announced its decision to proceed with a pilot program of voluntary service to Canada. At that time Mr. William McWhinney, who had been executive secretary of CUSO, was appointed interim director of the company. Since then the interim staff of the company has been reviewing project suggestions which have been received from government departments, federal and provincial, from organizations, from groups and from individuals all over Canada. The staff has also examined applications from many Canadians of all ages who have indicated their desire to take part in the company's operations when those operations begin.
Last month, Mr. Speaker, the government appointed an interim advisory council for the company to give advice to the government concerning proposed first year operations and to assist the staff of the company in carrying out certain pilot projects. The chairman of this advisory council is Mr. Douglas Ward, president-elect of the Canadian Union of Students, and the vice chairman Mr. Marc
June 10, 1966

Company of Young Canadians Lalonde, a distinguished lawyer from Montreal.
[DOT] (2:50 p.m.)
When the organization committee made its report last November, it strongly recommended the need for the company to have a maximum degree of independence and flexibility, and the bill which is before the house for second reading embodies, I believe, that principle. It provides for the kind of freedom and manoeuvrability which will permit company volunteers in Canada and abroad to work in co-operation with a wide variety of groups and other agencies, both governmental and private. We hope also, Mr. Speaker, that the company will be encouraged to be experimental as well as responsible in its approach to problems, and that the company staff, council and volunteers will not be afraid to move into new and creative areas of social action.
The bill before the house provides for a council of 15 members, 10 of whom shall be elected by the volunteers themselves, with the other five appointed by the governor in council. This provision, Mr. Speaker, should ensure that the experience which volunteers gain in the field will be brought into the administrative affairs and management of the company. It indicates clearly that this is not only to be a company for young Canadians but a company of young Canadians, a company in which young Canadians themselves will play a major role in determining plans, operations and obectives.
The objects of the company, as hon. members perhaps know, are outlined in clause 14 of the bill, part of which reads:
-to support, encourage and develop programs for social, economic and community development in Canada or abroad through voluntary service.
Clause 15 of the bill outlines some of the areas in which the company may operate.
Before mentioning some of the specific projects which have been suggested for inclusion in this year's pilot program-incidentally, 60 such projects have been submitted to the interim organization of the company and 35 of these have been accepted as suitable for company action if parliament approves this legislation-and what they are concerned with, there are one or two general points which should be made about the programs in which company volunteers will participate.
Suggestions for company projects in Canada should, I believe, normally come from the people in the communities concerned. Suggestions should come from below and not


necessarily, or perhaps even normally, from above. The company should respond to express requests to have volunteers working in a particular community on a particular project, but volunteers would not be sent where they would not be needed or welcome. The Company of Young Canadians will not be able to fulfil its potential by sitting in offices in Ottawa and deciding what the volunteers will do and where they will do it.
Canadians through their organizations, through government departments and informal groups should be asked to make suggestions, as they have already done, about how the company volunteers could most effectively operate. Suggested projects in Canada which the company might support in its pilot program and in the years ahead have already, as I have said, been brought to the company's attention from communities, groups, individuals and agencies throughout the country by letter, by discussion groups and as a result of conferences.
We have felt, Mr. Speaker, that this approach is fundamental to the whole future of the company and will be essential, I think, if it is to realize its potential value. It will be quite wrong, as I see it, for the government or for the company itself to try to impose any program or any project on any group or community.
The nature of the proposed projects, and they are outlined in a general way in clause 15 of the bill, indicates the kind of work that it is expected the company will do. Some organizations have urged the government to provide volunteers for work in urban depressed areas where the volunteers would assist the residents of that particular area in identifying and understanding common problems and in considering ways and means of taking appropriate action to deal with them. These problems might relate to poor housing, inadequate recreational facilities, lack of language classes for new Canadians or poor counselling and home economics opportunities.
A number of Indian band councils have expressed an interest in having company volunteers assist them in various ways, in starting recreational programs, in assisting in the preparation of briefs and other documents for official agencies and governments, in developing local co-operatives and handicraft industries. Representatives of certain provincial governments have told the company of the need to work in their areas with high school drop-outs, assisting them in
June 10, 1966	COMMONS
finding jobs or in preparing for job opportunities. Indian and Metis organizations have requested volunteers to help in developing social and recreational activities for their members and in helping to make sure of school educational opportunities.
The company staff has been told of the many difficulties encountered by many immigrants who come to Canada and need assistance in learning French or English and in adapting to the different characteristics of their new country. It is felt that the company could help here.
Some provincial government representatives have emphasized the need for community development programs, especially in rural areas where the company could, it was felt, be helpful. There were as well representations from some rural groups for assistance in starting community health or educational programs.
It is important to note, Mr. Speaker, that in all such proposed projects or programs the company would operate only in co-operation with the many other organizations and agencies already in the field which are already attempting to deal with these social and economic problems.
Company volunteers will not necessarily be experts nor will they have a ready mix of preconceived notions to apply to whatever community situation they may discover. Their approach will be to help the people of the community decide what should be done and to work with them in the doing of it.
During the first year of the company's operations volunteers will work only within Canada. This will be during the first year. Already excellent work has been carried out by Canadian University Service Overseas volunteers since 1961. It was decided to concentrate during this initial period on domestic programs while considering how the company's future international role could be most effectively undertaken.
[DOT] (3:00 p.m.)
I think all Canadians can be justifiably proud of the 550 Canadian men and women who have gone to the developing countries under CUSO sponsorship. The government itself has shown its confidence in CUSO through the increased financial help which has been granted by parliament. It is my hope that the formation of The Company of Young Canadians will make it possible in the future for many more Canadians to participate in overseas service. To that end, the staff and advisory council of the company are now
DEBATES	6259
Company of Young Canadians studying ways in which the company can undertake international assignments, and discussions are now being held with CUSO representatives to consider areas of co-operation, to avoid overlapping or duplication.
In domestic projects, company volunteers will fill only those positions which will not otherwise be filled from the existing labour force; they will do work which would not ordinarily be done by the labour force. In other words, volunteers will not be used as cheap labour.
It is expected that in the first year of operations a wide variety of projects concerning many different segments of the population will be undertaken so that future programs can be based on the most thorough field experience possible.
From time to time, since the announcement concerning the company was first made, I have been asked whether the government feels that young Canadians are ready to discharge the heavy and important responsibilities which will be theirs in the organization. This is an easy question to answer. In the last few years we have witnessed an immensely exciting and stimulating resurgence of social concern and responsibility on the part of young people The way in which young Canadians have responded to CUSO's appeal for volunteers willing to spend two years working abroad in developing countries is evidence of this new spirit. There are other organizations, expecially some of the student and religious organizations, which draw on this desire for participation which is so strong among Canada's young people.
Though there may be some exciting exceptions which prove this rule, the younger generation today possesses idealism without illusion; realism without cynicism. These young people desire to make a forceful and direct contribution to the kind of society they feel is worth living in, working for and fighting for, and I hope this feeling will find concrete expression in The Company of Young Canadians.
The applications already received by the company show that our confidence in young Canadians has not been misplaced. More than 2,500 of these inquiries and applications have already been received, even before the legislation has been passed, and they show a great diversity of background and interest. Many of those who have applied are undergraduates or recent graduates of universities-30 per cent to date. Others are attending or have graduated from high schools-45 per cent to
June 10, 1966

Company of Young Canadians date. Others have been out working, often for as long as 20 or 30 years and wish now to take on this kind of voluntary service for two years. Forty per cent of all applications received have been from young women. The minimum age for volunteers is 18 but there is no upper age limit-this will enable them to accommodate the Secretary of State (Miss LaMarsh).


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Although the vast majority, about 85 per cent, are in the age group 18 to 25, a number of applications have been received, as I have already noted, from people in their forties, fifties and sixties and it is to be hoped that many people in this age bracket, young in spirit, will find an opportunity to express their social concern through working with the company.
Volunteers will be selected on the basis of their personal qualities, their experience in working with other people and their ability to work effectively in a particular company project. They will take part in a six weeks orientation program before proceeding to their assignments. This program will emphasize aptitudes in human relations, community development techniques, and knowledge of the region and community where the volunteer will work. Once the volunteers are in the field, they will be called together from time to time to evaluate their experience and to take part in further learning sessions. When in the field, they will have the support and advice of people from the agency which is sponsoring their project, other local persons and members of the company staff. They will be granted allowances for food and accommodation, and for expenses appropriate to their projects. They will also receive a small personal allowance. Upon completion of their term of service, they will receive a small honorarium for each month of service.
Any assessment of the impact and importance of The Company of Young Canadians must, of course, await the experience of the first year's program. But we can be reasonably sure about some things. While the volunteer is making a contribution to the social, economic or cultural development of a community, he will also be learning from the people with whom he works. A two-way learning process will be an integral part of every project. If the evidence of similar organizations is any indication, volunteers who serve in the company will leave it as

better citizens, committed to a renewed concern for their fellowmen and a clearer understanding of the processes of change which are so essential to any dynamic and democratic society.
I hope the company, through its volunteers, will have a stimulating, creative effect upon our society and its institutions, and will also help the people of new nations overseas. I believe the company will prove to be an organization deeply concerned with the fundamentals of inequality and poverty in our society and with social justice and democratic progress, and that it will become part of our continuing search for a better Canada in a better world. It is in this spirit that I ask for the support of the house on the second reading of this bill.
[DOT] (3:10 p.m.)


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, the bill before the house is part, I believe, of a world wide recognition of a fundamental fact, namely that the society of the nations of the world cannot continue with the rich becoming richer and the poor relatively poorer.
When one looks at the situation domestically and recognizes the tremendous gap between those who have their foot on the ladder and are sharing in the growing wealth of a modern industrial nation like Canada, and the fact that there is a substantial group in our country, I would say approximately 20 per cent, who do not seem to have the ability or the opportunity to get on that first step of the ladder, then one realizes the size of the task before us.
But if one projects his mind to the situation all over the world where a great majority know that in spite of all their efforts over the next 35 years the best they can do is raise their per capita income from $100 a year to $170 a year, a gain of 70 per cent, while at the same time industrial nations expect to double their per capita income, again using round figures, from $2,500 to $5,000, one can see that the gap between $100 and $2,500, as it is now, will be much greater 35 years from now when the gap is between $170 and $5,000. I am using very broad figures covering the whole industrial segment of the world as opposed to the newly developing segments.
These two sets of facts are the challenge before the countries of the world today. This bill is an attempt by the government to bring Canada into this movement to try and bridge this gulf not only at home but abroad. As
June 10, 1966

such I do not think there is a Canadian in the country who does not give his approval to the aims and purposes of this legislation.
I cannot go so far as to say that I think this is going to work easily, because I know it is not, but I do think it is something upon which the government should be congratulated. I shall admit immediately that the government copied the American precedent. One month after President Johnson, in his address on the state of the nation, coined the phrase, "A war on poverty" we had a "Company of Young Canadians" suggested to us. It is copied obviously after the Peace Corps and after the program called Vista-Volunteers in Service to America.
But even though it is copied after the Americans, that is not fatal to the idea. What concerns me more is the point that the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) dealt with in his speech, namely the tremendous desire of young people in every country of the world to serve. A generation ago people were idealistic, but sentimentally idealistic. They were the type of people who would serve their country behind great slogans like "A war to save democracy," and "A war to end discrimination."
We pay honour to those generations; but today the fact is that we have a new type of generation on our hands, a generation which is not sentimental and which does not believe these sentimental bromides that so many of us followed, and that some of us still follow. The young generation today has idealism, a cynical type of idealism, but it takes the form of wanting to participate. They want to be part of the action.
This leads me to the main concern I have about the legislation now before us. The concern that I have is that, with all this tremendous willingness of 10 per cent, 20 per cent or 30 per cent of our young people leaving high schools and leaving universities who want to be part of the action to help at home and abroad, and their willingness to volunteer in their hundreds and thousands, if this program does not give them full opportunity and full challenge, if it leaves thejn dissatisfied, feeling that there is lack of organization, that they are not doing an effective job, or if this program sends them into operations unprepared, the disillusionment that comes so quickly to young people will be disastrous for the concepts that this legislation entails.
Company of Young Canadians
This is the fear that some of us have, some of us who have been thinking along the idea of doing something in an active way to meet this challenge of today. Looking at this legislation, and looking at what has been done in the United States and here to date, this is one fear that does engulf us. If these young people lose their idealism, if they are not fully used in this program, if the challenges are not every day greater than their abilities so that they know they are doing something useful, and if they are not succeeding-because there never will be success in this type of program if these factors are lacking-and if as a result they feel disillusionment, the result with this type of program in the future will, as I said, be disastrous.
I have expressed this concern in a general way. I have known young men of my own generation and young men and women of this generation, and I can assure the house that the young men of this generation will not be as patient as we were in ours. We were impatient in our own way; we rebelled in many ways, but we would accept. The young generation will not be as patient as we were in our time, and the generation ahead of us were in their time. If they do not get satisfaction immediately that they are doing a good job and a well organized job, then the very nature of their being today, which is to be activist, will lead to a disillusionment that will spread and cause serious harm to this concept.
Talk to the young men who have served in our armed forces for this last 10 years. They go in full of idealism; they want to serve their country. They are willing to spend part of their time at university in military service. They are willing to accept lower wages during summer in order to be in the armed forces and serve their country. But after two or three years you usually find the vast majority of these young men with their morale down, with disillusionment in the military and disillusionment in the government, because in the final analysis it always comes back to that place.
This does not make me glad. It bothers me, because their disillusionment spreads to others who are not quite as idealistic, and if this attitude develops in this country it bodes ill for the future. I think I have said enough on this point to indicate what I think is the chief danger ahead. I believe it can be overcome. I believe it can be met if the government is willing to move slowly and deliberately through its officials to lay down what the
6262	COMMONS
Company of Young Canadians problem is, lay down the procedures, and train these young people properly.
[DOT] (3:20 p.m.)
If I may, I would like at this time to suggest the way that some of us would have liked to do this. The problem we are talking about is not new. Those of us who approach these things carefully, and in the long run we believe that to be the most successful way, always like to know where we are going. In the party to which I belong this problem was one of our major concerns. On the agricultural front we introduced the legislation known as ARDA. The house may recall that in the debate which made that bill into a statute I opposed my own legislation on third reading. Because there was no opposition on second reading-everyone seemed to be in favour of the idea of ARDA-I felt it was my duty to point out to the house that there were dangers. The dangers which I pointed out are not too unlike what I point out today. I am glad I opposed my own legislation on ARDA, because it made clear to those administering the program what I felt were the danger points. I think they have benefited by that warning and have tended to move slowly and carefully into this very difficult area.
The dangers are very simple and yet very complex. The two main difficulties in dealing with any kind of a program concerning poverty or the lack of use of human resources are, first of all, educational, and secondly sociological. If you examine the work to date in the three main aspects of the war on poverty in the United States, you will find in nearly every case that these two factors are the things which come to the surface and which are causing trouble. Of course in the United States the trouble was that somebody had a brilliantly idealistic idea and, being typically American, they rushed into it, set up a program, called for volunteers and rushed into battle. Now they are trying to assess their difficulties and fight their way out of the messes which need not have occurred had they taken proper precautions.
As the house may remember, in 1962 the prime minister of that day, the right hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker) proposed a national conference on human resources. This proposal was made because after our study of the problem we recognized that within the confines of the civil service, for the advice of ministers, there was insufficient information and there were insufficient ideas to successfully tackle this problem. We recognize that it would take two or three

DEBATES	June 10, 1966
years of searching through the whole world for people in the social science field who had ideas as to how to tackle this problem, and whom we could bring to our conference where, with the preliminary preparation which had been made in advance, we could have a long slow deliberate discussion so that we would be in a position to lay down the guide lines not only for the senior governments at the provincial and federal level but also for the local governments, the individuals across the country and particularly the hundreds of little organizations which now deal with this type of problem.
When one counts up the number of organizations in a large metropolitan city which deal domestically with this type of problem, the figure runs into the hundreds, not the scores. Therefore overlapping and confusion is the greatest single difficulty in the big urban centres. Our concern was to bring together the best minds of the world in an effort to see, when sitting down with the representatives of government, these organizations and individuals, whether we could agree on the precise nature of the problems and the course of action to take in respect of each particular type of problem.
Let me mention some of these problems. One of the great tragedies of modern day living is the fact that in our built-up communities we have hundreds of thousands of people whom we classify as aged. An aged person may be a person who has been pensioned off at age 55. There are many of those; an example would be the members of our armed services. There are many whose jobs have changed, who are pensioned off and who cannot find new employment. In general language they are classified as being aged.
Second, through technological changes in the field of health, man no longer is an old person at age 60, 65, 70 or 75; it depends on the individual. So we have many thousands of people in the very prime of their mental ability who are cut off because of pension policies and because of rules in industry and in the professions. Here you have a tremendous unused human resource which has tremendous potential and which could fill a need in this area. This potential is not being utilized because it is not being organized. In this group of aged I include the housewife whose family is raised. The woman who is, say 45 or 50 years of age, still has some of her skills from the days when she was working and now is much more experienced in looking after individuals. Yet in many cases
June 10, 1966	COMMONS
this very effective person is left to amuse herself with curling games, bridge games, sometimes gardening, and so on. This is an unused human resource which can become a burden on society because of frustrations, and in extreme cases mental health problems. We can utilize that human resource for greater productivity and for the greater enjoyment of the people of the country.
The problems of the aged people are not all problems of health. There is the problem of utilization. This is one field in which there is a tremendous amount of information available in respect of the type of programs which could be worked out in communities of every size for people of every skill and background. This material should be collected and put into the hands of an organization such as the one being created by this bill, so that the organization would have something to work with.
When you go into the field of the handicapped, it is only 20 years ago that people who were deaf and who were blind were considered to be seriously handicapped. Now the social scientist knows that in many forms of activity the person who is deaf has an advantage over the hearing person, and the person who cannot see has tremendous advantages over the seeing person. Let us go down the list of the handicapped. We come to the spastic. Until the last ten years in many, and perhaps most, of the countries in the western world the only social disposition we could make of them was to bring them out of the home in which they were hidden and put them in an institution. Now we have many places where the spastic can be rehabilitated and where with physiotherapy treatment and teaching, depending on his mental ability, he is able to go into almost any occupation, although there probably would be an exception in the case of surgery and jewelry work.
The work done in respect of spastics in this past ten years is a revelation. This is a unique human resource. However, in Canada as yet there is no definite program for spastics. There are, let us say 20,000, available persons in this country at any age. We are not using the knowledge which is available. We are not using and organizing the type of information we have. When we get to the retarded, we find we have made tremendous progress in this field in the last 15 years. In Canada we have gone as far as putting up sheltered workshops for them. This type of sheltered workshop is so obsolete in the new knowledge that no modern social scientist wants to speak of it any longer. Yet in Canada we have not made any attempt to
DEBATES	6263
Company of Young Canadians take these hundreds of thousands of retarded people and utilize them.
[DOT] (3:30 p.m.)
The answers are very simple, once you know them. Everyone knows if you can break down a complicated industrial task into simple components so that even a five-year-old can do them, then it does not matter whether that five-year old mind is in a forty-year-old body or not, that individual can match the efficiency of any workman doing the job in the country. These things are not dreams, they are facts, because this is taking place in many parts of the world today except Canada. Will this organization have this information available in order to utilize these tremendous unused human resources?
This same principle applies to the delinquents of this country. The desire of young people to take action and to belong to groups that are different from their seniors is motivated by a force that can be used for good purposes. I am not suggesting that the only answer is to teach them to wear tight pants, pointed shoes, long hair and to beat guitars, although that is how the energy of certain young people of Liverpool was used. This drive in young people to participate can be channelled into many good things. A tremendous amount of knowledge in this regard has been compiled in numerous writings, but very few of us have access to all of these writings in the world in one place.
I have dealt with the two sections of the human resources of our country in respect of which some effort must be made, the aged and the handicapped. I could go on and list many other groups, but what I am trying to say is that, just as under ARDA, where we tried to develop a concept which would meet the needs of those many thousands of people living on the land who were not able to take advantage of the opportunities around them, in order to give them a chance to earn a better income, so here could we develop a concept which would give similar opportunities to the people living in cities.
I am always concerned when I read what is happening in relation to the horrible "snafus" that are taking place in various areas of the United States, resulting in a tremendous amount of idealism and enthusiasm being turned into an unholy mess. Yet, if you look at these examples in the United States you will find may successes too. Some lessons can be learned from these successes and failures.
June 10, 1966

Company of Young Canadians
I am not pessimistic about the future, but with all the strength at my command I am trying to give warning of the danger that exists because the task we are undertaking and must accomplish in dealing with those who need help is extemely important. After reading this bill and listening to the Prime Minister today my fears are confirmed. I was waiting to hear the problems outlined and specific guide lines laid down. There is nothing in this bill that gives a clear-cut concept of what is to be done. The Prime Minister was vague in his remarks, and one can understand why I am concerned.
I approach this whole problem naturally as a Conservative would. In 1962 it was suggested that we should have a national conference on human resources. I still believe that such a conference must be held in order to collect together this tremendous amount of knowledge from social scientists around the world so that guide lines can be adopted to provide some tangible program for the group of people administering this legislation to follow.
When I think of the individual who will head this operation I am sorry for him. He will be faced with problems similar to those faced by the communists in Russia in 1917 to 1928 when all they had to follow was the doctrine of Karl Marx. It took those people 20 years to decide that they should push his doctrine aside and find something which would make their system work in practice. Karl Marx did not deal with practical problems of human civilization; he dealt with ideas. It is one of our modern miracles that the Russians were able to survive as a nation. In order to realize this one need only read his work, Das Kapital. The same thing applies to the Chinese. Imagine their trying to build a socialized nation on the teachings of Karl Marx and the precedents of experience in Russia. Thank heaven the Chinese are very pragmatic people and can learn from the mistakes of others.
In any event, the situation will be similar for the individual who heads this organization, using this bill and the Prime Minister's speech as a guide. The only thing I can suggest is that by prayer we had better turn this whole matter over to the power above, because certainly there is no guidance coming from the government.
The reasons I have not dealt with sociology in detail in Canada are I think self-evident. If the Prime Minister searched through all the civil service agencies here in Ottawa and across the country and found five practising

sociologists he would be lucky. When I was minister I could only find one practising, and another working on a farm outside Ottawa because he could not find employment in his field of learning. Yet the lack of men experienced in this field will in effect be the rock upon which ARDA will founder and the rock upon which this program will founder.
Sociology is a big word, but in plain terms it means knowing how people think. If you want a farmer to do something which you know is good, would you send a young kid fresh out of school wearing a white shirt to discuss the situation with that farmer; and if you did, do you think he would be successful? I suggest that such action could only be classified as conspiracy to murder. If you want an individual who has lived in the slum areas of our cities for years to act differently and do things differently, do you send an idealistic individual to teach him how to live in a home under our modern concepts? Speaking in the crude language which has been ascribed to me by the Prime Minister, let me suggest that we must learn to back into a beer parlour. You must appear to be looking one way while going another: That is sociology. You must bring a person to the point of wanting to do what you think is good for him.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is good Conservatism.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: As the leader of the New Democratic Party has said on occasion, you cannot go forward by facing backwards. He has not learned the truth of human nature as yet, because the fastest way to go forward is by moving into the future, knowing the lessons of the past.


Francis Andrew Brewin: That sounds like a Conservative M.P.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I think I can demonstrate that fact with a good many examples. When you encourage people to accompany you step by step you make progress. When you tell a group of people, even if you possess all the good ideas and brilliance in the world, that something is good for them and they should go ahead with it, you usually accomplish nothing. One should consider what happened to Lesage in Quebec. He collected together a great many people with brains, idealism and enthusiasm-


Mr. Gray:: Any sociologists?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: -but he forgot about sociologists. If he had had the benefit of the advice
June 10, 1966

of one ordinary, common sense sociologist he would have moved a shade slower, looking one way and going another, and may have been successful.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)
I mention these things because of personal feelings and the fact that I feel very keenly about this type of legislation. I want this legislation to succeed, but I have in all intellectual honesty to point to what I think are the dangers. I think we will still need some form of national conference of human resources. That may take two or three years to get ready. The educational program will stem from this. You will then give the organization something tangible with which to work. There will be a tremendous amount of time spent in obtaining the properly trained person, because you have to deal with not only the farmer and people who are poor but the juvenile delinquent brought up in a slum district, and so on. There are many people around who are properly qualified. You do not get them by snapping your fingers. It will take time. If I have been facetious, Mr. Speaker, it is because I feel deeply about these matters and want to get my point across to the house.
The second point with which I wish to deal concerns the age factor. The recruits will be mostly from the age group 18 to 30. I am not quarrelling with that. There is also the suggestion that the age can go up to 50. This is the point I want to speak about. I think there are two stages in a person's life when the urge to do something for his fellow man is paramount. The first stage is coming out of high school and university when a certain percentage of our young people, freed with the little bit of knowledge they have obtained, want to go forward and help others. What the percentage is, we do not know; but I think it is substantial-10, 20 or 30 per cent. That person eventually becomes married, has a house to buy and a car, all the other things to acquire, children to educate, and so on. For a period of 25 years he is usually lost to this form of idealistic enterprise of helping others. Therefore the time to get people to serve in this type of operation is in the age group from high school to university. I think this is covered in the bill.
The second group are those people from 45 up, who in our modern economy have usually reached high enough in their professions and job classification that they feel they have come to the end of their upward progress. If

Company of Young Canadians one examines the civil service at the provincial or federal level, he finds that in the pyramids of people forcing their way up are few places at the top. Many, many people at the middle levels are tremendously capable but there are only one or two spots at the top. These people at the middle levels have raised their families; they have great ability and experiance. If a recruiting program in this age group were carried out it would yield in the long run more effective workers than would be obtained at the younger level. This applies to medical people and those in all the professions.
At the age of 45 or 50 many of these people feel they have done well in their profession; their income is satisfactory and they would like to do something very, very useful for the 20 or 30 years they have left. I could quote the names of many Canadians who fit into this category and demonstrate my point. Using my own province as an example, there is Dr. Hardy, who was Dean of Engineering of the University of Saskatchewan. He spent 15 of the happiest years of his life serving in Ceylon. Every three years he came home to Canada on leave. As I say, Mr. Speaker, this was a great man at the University of Saskatchewan. But there comes a time when you are a little tired of teaching class after class of engineering students about farm machinery. He went to a country that needed him. Any man who ever spoke to Dr. Hardy recognized that here was a happy man, a man at the full height of his intellect, a man who wanted to use the years left to him on behalf of those who needed his help most.
Dr. Harrington, who is now with FAO, is one of the great plant biologists in the world. He left our province and served in Egypt, Israel, and is now with FAO. This is a happy man. He was at the top of his profession in Canada. He is now providing huge benefits to those he is serving. A doctor 50 years of age came to me a year ago and asked if he could serve abroad. I tried to get him into China, because that is where he wanted to go, but apparently we do not recognize China so he ended up in Africa. That man is a successful surgeon and is now providing tremendous benefits to those he is serving in Africa. I know that people of this age group would supply a tremendous number of recruits.
The practical proposal with regard to people in the civil service, the teaching profession, or those in private, professional occupations is to provide them, if they are civil
June 10. 1966

Company of Young Canadians servants, with a guarantee that when they come back to this country their pension will be intact. If this is done they will use their talents in a new country, knowing that when they return to Canada their pension will be there. We tried to do this, as a government. At the United Nations the prime minister of that day suggested that Canada would be glad to set up a bank of brains to help the underdeveloped nations of the world. This bank of brains was to come from the older people. I think we set this program up so that any person who wanted to go abroad would have his pension protected. I do not think the program was sufficiently advertised or sold to the people. Our government was a failure in public relations, even on good ideas.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask the house to join with the Prime Minister and pass this legislation. I shall join with the Prime Minister in this respect and hope that the legislation will start Canada on the task of developing opportunities for young people with ideas and ability to help themselves and also to help others. I know of the dangers ahead and I know of the pitfalls that will very likely lie in the path of this operation. I have described in my own way some of the pitfalls in dealing with human nature in our own country. I would suggest that these pitfalls are the same abroad. In addition, when these young people, and perhaps some of the older people, go abroad they should learn that in these newly developing nations they will have to contend with nationalism the like of which they have never known before. They will have to contend with discrimination the like of which they have never known before.
It is very good for the person whose skin is white to be in the minority in a country where the skin of the majority is a different colour and to realize that he is the odd person and the one who suffers discrimination. If they can learn to recognize that in these ancient lands they do have their own cultures-and some of the cultures of Asia are far superior in many ways to our own; and in Africa, even though they may have tribal cultures, they are their cultures-and can learn the humility of accepting the fact that this is the culture of these people and their civilization, and remember that all you do is stir up antagonism, dislike and, yes, hatred if you walk around with the typical air of superiority of the white man, they will be able to help these people very much more.


These things are sociological and have to be learned, and if there is a genuine desire, as I am sure there is, on behalf of Canadians and many other people to help others, if we can train our people to move into these fields as humble servants of a greater cause than just themselves, I believe that great good both at home and abroad can come from this kind of legislation.
[DOT] (3:50 p.m.)


Francis Andrew Brewin: As I
listened to the very interesting and eloquent speech of the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Hamilton), I must confess I was puzzled by one aspect of his speech. It was why, when he so clearly is aware of the pitfalls that lie ahead in this connection, he advocated moving backward, as I understood it, into the beverage rooms or something like that. This seemed to me a puzzling posture for one who is well aware of the pitfalls that lie ahead.
However, Mr. Speaker, I am not sure whether it is suitable for someone like myself, who is a grandfather of several years standing, to be speaking on this particular bill. I was rather encouraged by the elastic definition of youth which the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) said was fundamental to this particular project and to the corporation we are discussing. We, in this party, would like to extend our wholehearted support to this bill. I say "wholehearted" not because we accept it uncritically or without question, but because we have looked at it carefully, and we think despite the difficulties that this is extremely worth while.
I should like to refer to a paragraph from the program of my particular party which was passed at our founding convention in 1961. I do so, not to suggest any originality or authorship of this idea, which I know is a widespread one, but to indicate why we support this legislation. This paragraph reads:
Canada must mobilize its resources in young, trained Canadians and establish a voluntary service corps to staff co-operative aid schemes, such as those of the joint training and technical expert program, throughout the world. Its members should be encouraged to regard their work as a career and should be given adequate salaries and full security. The corps would collaborate with similar groups from other developed states, and would also provide on-the-spot training for local personnel in the techniques of community development.
There are some differences between this project and the one envisaged in this resolution. I just wanted to point out that we
June 10, 1966

thought this idea of such fundamental importance we incorporated it in the program produced at the founding convention of our party.
As I understand it, the purpose of this legislation is to mobilize the idealism of younger people, which is a great resource. I think that this project is infinitely worth while. I do not believe any term for the volunteer's contract is set out in the bill, but I presume that will be spelled out later. I believe the fact that young men, after suitable training and education, are willing to volunteer for two years or more in this type of service will turn out to be a very great source of strength and experience for those who take part, and for the whole community.
As has been said, of course this is not an original or new idea. The Peace Corps of the United States is one in which the government has been interested for some time. I cannot help but refer in this connection to the heroic courage of those who have gone out to the different countries in the world to help, in the same spirit as is involved here, in what used to be called the missionary field. I know they went out with special instructions and special purposes for their own particular faith. Nevertheless I know from my own experience they performed a tremendous service, and it was voluntary service in many cases, to the communities in which they live.
We all know about the American Friends Service Committee, and I believe our own Friends in Canada have, for many years, been engaged in this work. I was very happy to hear the Prime Minister tell us that there would be the closest co-operation between The Company of Young Canadians and the Canadian University Services Overseas. They have been in the field for some time and have done a tremendously useful job. The Company of Young Canadians will no doubt either take some part of their job or possibly the government will expand its contribution to CUSO.
The success of this type of work depends upon several things, one of which is the choice of project. I was very happy indeed to hear the Prime Minister say that the emphasis would be upon communities and upon promoting self help with communities; that the younger people would not be sent out to undertake the job of trying to raise standards, and so on, in any particular community without the prior request of the people within the community. I do believe there is a tremendous field for assistance of people in communities by young, trained persons
Company of Young Canadians with a sympathetic approach to these matters. Sometimes, since they come from outside, they have a particular type of energy which is valuable to people within the community who may have given up hope about what can be done.
I am thinking of the field of housing, for example I see the Minister of Labour (Mr. Nicholson) in the house. He will agree with me, I think that we have passed all sorts of legislation at the federal level, the provincial level and the municipal level to make funds and plans available to deal with some of our housing problems, such as slum clearance projects and things of that sort. These government plans seldom work out properly unless the people in the local community take the initiative and desire to work with the plans. I believe that one of the functions of this Company of Young Canadians will be to help create an atmosphere to enable the various communities to be conscious of the machinery of government at various levels available to them. I want to say that, in so far as the choice of a project is concerned, I hope the rule will continue to be observed, as I think the Prime Minister said it would be, to first of all make sure of the full desire of the community to be helped and to receive their full co-operation. I believe the initiative should come from them, and that they should feel a sense of participation in what is being done.
Another thing that will be absolutely essential, of course, will be the careful selection of the people to do the job. It is impossible to be certain that you always get the right people, but I think this is very important I wonder, after there has been some experience, whether the method of selection could not be more fully spelled out in the bill.
Then, Mr. Speaker, there is the question of training. I believe the Prime Minister said that training would be for six weeks. This may be adequate for people going to work in Canada, but if it is proposed that some volunteers work outside Canada I just wonder whether six weeks, no matter how inen-sive the training, is adequate. It seems to me language training may be required. Physical hardening for some of the projects involved may also be required. Training, I think, is a very important part of this whole project.
[DOT] (4:00 p.m.)
I wanted to read two comments, Mr. Speaker. I never expected to find myself
g268	COMMONS
Company of Young Canadians quoting in this house Senator Barry Gold-water, because generally speaking I find myself in very strong disagreement with the views he expresses from time to time. But when he was dealing with the Peace Corps, which is a very similar organization and on which this company, to some extent I think, is modelled, he said this:
I think that the Peace Corps is beginning to remove the doubts from the doubters' minds. I have been impressed with the quality of the young men and women that have been going into it. At first I thought that it would advance work for a group of beatnicks, but this is not so. As a businessman,
I know that two years overseas experience will be invaluable and rewarding. I'll back it all the way.
This is a conversion of what might be thought to be a case of individual Republicanism into a useful project. Again let me say that I do not want to be thought to be in any way his disciple, but I find those words well said and I commend them to the house.
Another quotation I should like to read to the house is that of the vice president of the Philippines, who was addressing and being frank with a group of Peace Corps teachers in his country. I think what he said applies equally to many other countries. He said:
The problems which the Peace Corps will find here in the Philippines are not too different from those it will encounter in many countries of Asia and Africa.
They are the problems of underdevelopment, problems that long antedate communism, neutralism, the Cold War-they are the problems of poverty, ignorance and disease.
I pause there to point out that even in this fortunate country we are not without the problems of poverty, ignorance and disease. The vice president continues:
I believe I am not shattering any illusions when I say that those problems will not disappear with the coming of the Peace Corps.
Nor with the coming of The Company of Young Canadians, for that matter.
But certainly you can help; certainly you can make a significant contribution toward overcoming them.
We have a saying in Tagalog.
I take that to be the language spoken in the Philippines, and I am not going to attempt to read to the house the words which follow. But translated the words mean:
Even the hardest stone will wear away under constant drops of rain.
The vice president continued:
Your labours in our fields and barrios, in our schoolhouses and community centres, will be like those constant drops of rain, slowly but surely eroding the boulders of poverty, ignorance and
[Mr. Brewin.i
DEBATES	June 10, 1966
disease which block the road to greatness and prosperity for this country.
I think those words uttered by a spokesman of a recipient country are well said: and I believe that the effect of the work of The Company of Young Canadians, wherever it is active, will be to help erode the boulders of poverty, ignorance and disease.
I should like to conclude by saying that it seems to me that this project helps to give the lie to a great deal of quite unfounded pessimism about the standards, the outlook and the ideas of the younger people in this country and in other countries. I personally find the greatest sense of hope for the future welfare of the world in the attitudes taken by the younger people. They are not the same attitudes that we as a whole have taken. They are in many cases much better attitudes, attitudes which are much more ready to recognize the need for a world community and much more ready sometimes to recognize the grave dangers of our racial divisions. They are attitudes with new loyalties which are appropriate to a new and growing world society.
I believe, Mr. Speaker, that this Company of Young Canadians is but one instrument, but it will be a useful instrument not only for dealing with the community problems that it will be tackling, but also for gaining experience, breadth and outlook which will be invaluable to this country in the future. It is for these reasons, Mr. Speaker, that we would support the legislation which is before us.


Robert Norman Thompson: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Social Credit party and as far as my own personal support of this project is concerned I am pleased to identify our members with this legislation and to give it our approval here in this chamber, as the bill passes through its various stages into legislation. I think this Company of Young Canadians represents the type of project which we should have within our own national development; and I must say that I have had a very personal interest in it ever since it was first mentioned by the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson).
I say this because during the early years of the war, which is now more than 20 years ago, it was my personal privilege to accept a similar challenge as that represented in the objectives of The Company of Young Canadians, and as a result was able to lead a team of Canadians to Ethiopia, which was the first country liberated in world war II. Not
June 10, 1966
knowing what we were heading into, but being aware of the tremendous needs created by the conflict in that African country, we found ourselves faced with the challenge of fitting into a picture which included every possible phase of need, as far as the people of what might be called a primitive society were concerned-needs of education, as well as in the areas of health and community development.
Most of us were able to spend a good part of our adult years in what I would consider to be the type of project with which The Company of Young Canadians will be concerned. I have always been very grateful for this opportunity, Mr. Speaker. As 1 have watched our own young people grow up, I have always been of the conviction that, if a similar opportunity could be provided to more of our young people, not only would they be able to render a very useful service to humanity but it would also be a tremendous experience for them.
The real benefit of a project such as this is twofold. It is of direct benefit as far as the service rendered is concerned; and there are surely any number of needs, some of them urgent and vital, waiting to be met not only at home but particularly in the developing countries of the world. Then there is also a very real benefit to be gained by those who take part in providing this type of service, a type of benefit that will not only help the individual but will also prove of tremendous value to the community in which he lives and in later years to the country itself.
As a result of my experience in Africa I was able to watch the developing years of the Peace Corps movement from the United States. I hope that the work of young Canadians in foreign lands, as it has developed through CUSO, Crossroads Africa and other private projects, will not follow exactly the same pattern as did the Peace Corps. Yet I have been tremendously impressed with the work the Peace Corps has done. I have been even more impressed with the result this experience has had on the lives of those who were part of it.
[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)
I think we could say this about the work of the CUSO organization. In a very quiet and typically Canadian way hundreds of our young people have gone out and have been doing work in foreign countries, a job similar to that intended to be done by The Company of Young Canadians at home.
6269
Company of Young Canadians
A day or so ago I received an explanatory statement defining the purposes and projected types of activity of The Company of Young Canadians. For the sake of the record, though I realize the Prime Minister already has referred to this in introducing the legislation, it might be well to quote from this bulletin. We are told that the main purpose of The Company of Young Canadians will be-
-to provide assistance to individuals and communities to overcome some of the problems of poverty, injustice and inequality which exist in society. The company will do this by recruiting and assigning full-time volunteers to projects for social, economic and community development In Canada and abroad. It is being established not only in response to the very real needs for voluntary service, but also in response to the growing interest and concern of young Canadians to participate in constructive social action.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, we see that the role of The Company of Young Canadians, as has already been stated, has not so much to do with economic development or the material development of our own nation, but rather, with human resources. Surely this is the area where we ought to show greater concern than we have. Surely we also ought to be concerned with advancing the potentialities that are latent in the young people we have in our country. I hope that this organization, in working toward the fulfilment of its objectives, will be primarily concerned with this.
One thing that I have been concerned about, with respect to The Company of Young Canadians, was the slowness evident in defining its purposes and in laying out the pattern of its organization. I trust after this length of time a solid foundation has been provided today for the organization which is to develop and take shape out of the legislation before us at the present time.
In The Company of Young Canadians we have a great tradition involving the historical pattern of the past in our young country. As we look back into our history and think of the great explorers, the great adventurers, and of the great developments in recent years in areas of industry and commerce, we realize that many of the deeds carried out were performed by young people.
In the growing collectivism that surrounds us, and in the pattern of greater public participation in many things which were regarded the responsibility and the opportunity of the individual not so long ago, we perhaps have been guilty of neglecting the type of individual who has played such a vital part in our historical past. Through The Company

6270	COMMONS
Company of Young Canadians of Young Canadians there will be provided an opportunity for the young people of today to repeat, and perform in their own right, actions which belong to the heritage of our past.
I note in the legislation, Mr. Speaker, that the area of activity of The Company of Young Canadians is to be both national and international. May I make a cautionary remark about the latter aspect of activity, before speaking briefly about the former. It has not been indicated to us what form the foreign operations of The Company of Young Canadians will take. I think it is necessary for the organization itself to define this as soon as possible. May I say that I hope The Company of Young Canadians will not be moving directly into the area of foreign operations undertaken by such organizations as CUSO. When one compares the activities of the CUSO organization with, shall we say, the Peace Corps of the United States, it becomes apparent that one of the great assets of the CUSO organization is that it is not labelled with the stigma of being a foreign government agency. Although the Peace Corps of the United States has performed a very commendable service, repeatedly in foreign countries where the people are swayed by various types of propaganda the Peace Corps volunteers have been labelled as working for a government agency.
CUSO volunteers overseas have lived and worked on the same level as the nationals among whom they are, and by entering into what are called "local contracts", rather than by being the employees of a foreign agency, have been able to fit into the communities and to reach their objectives in a commendable way. On the other hand, while those in the Peace Corps serve without remuneration, the people serving with it live at a standard higher than those they are serving who are of comparative education and qualification. This has not been done with CUSO, where the volunteers have accepted local conditions, giving them a clearer understanding of local problems, and bringing to them the confidence of the people they are serving.
While I think it would be unwise for The Company of Young Canadians to set up an organization which would either replace or supplement the CUSO volunteers, I would hope in the years ahead that the company might move in to support and co-operate with the CUSO organization. I realize that some of the young people who are involved in The

DEBATES	June 10. 1966
Company of Young Canadians now, particularly Mr. McWhinney, have spoken about this in the past, so that it is perhaps not necessary to repeat what has been said.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)
I wish to emphasize the need to preserve such commendable efforts. There may be a temptation, in the desire to move ahead more rapidly, to take over CUSO. I think it would be tragic if any such move were made. To sum up, I believe the Company of Young Canadians ought not move into the area of foreign service but should support the organizations which are already active in this field, and rather help to make them more effective in fulfilling their responsibilities and achieving their objectives. Of all the spontaneous movements which have developed in the post-war years with the object of helping countries less fortunate than ourselves, CUSO heads the list. I am sure all of us who have had first-hand experience of the work being done in those countries will agree with this. It is my hope that the new organization will take full cognizance of this, and work to strengthen CUSO rather than replace it.
As to the company's activities on the home front, this is another story altogether. I notice that a report by the organizing committee called attention to three needs which the company should help to meet. First there are the needs of economically and socially deprived persons in Canada and overseas. I am speaking now about Canada. In this area one of the most urgent and challenging problems concerns our native Canadian people, the Eskimos and the Indians. A great many opportunities present themselves to an organization such as the one we are considering. In my own constituency, for example, there are three small Indian reserves all located not far from what might still be called the frontier town of Rocky Mountain House. How is one to integrate the activities, the education and the social life of young people growing up on these reserves? That is a real problem.
The people of this town, trying to meet their responsibilities, are now setting up a community centre for the use of these young Indian people. They are not sure just how it will operate. Everyone recognizes the need for such a centre and the people of the community sincerely desire to do something to help these young people.
I believe these volunteers could move in and do a tremendous job in connection with a project such as this. In fact I hope one of the first projects supported by the company at
June 10, 1966

home will be one such as this in my own constituency. I know that a similar need exists in many other areas. I do not think there is another field in Canada where our young people could perform a more effective service than they could in this type of project among our aboriginal people.
The organizing committee's report speaks, also, of the need of young people for more adequate channels through which young people could direct their ideals. I agree with this. In our changing society there is, indeed, a need to provide opportunities for constructive service for our young people-channels into which could be directed the energy, idealism and vision which is characteristic of them and which, all too often, they have no opportunity to express.
The third point made by the committee is also important-the need of our society as a whole for "domestic experimentation based on the constructive inter-action of the two groups". As I have indicated, I believe it would be better for the organization to concern itself directly with projects on the home front and co-operate with organizations already working overseas. In the years ahead, as more experience is gained, a better defined pattern of procedure will emerge and a more effective way found of reaching the goals which are the intent of the bill before us.
I do not know how the organization expects to finance its operations. It appears from this legislation that the public purse is expected to provide a major part of the funds required. I would add a cautionary word: It would be wrong for the organization to divorce itself completely from the support which might be obtained from the private sector of the economy. I am not thinking now of donations which might come from large organizations in industry and commerce or from the bigger social organizations across Canada. I am thinking of community participation.
I visualize these young people becoming in many ways direct community leaders as they go out to the tasks assigned to them. I believe there should be provision for community participation in the financial burdens which the programs will represent as well as in the programs themselves.
There is much more which could be said about the policy and objectives; more speculation as to how this program might develop. But I do not think this is really the time to enter upon a debate of this sort, since we are
Company of Young Canadians concerned, now, with fundamental principles-the basic objectives of the legislation before us.
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)
We are pleased therefore to support the principle of this legislation, and we shall reserve further remarks until we go into the details of it. Again I want to emphasize that we need such a program. We support the intended purposes of it, and we trust that as it moves forward into reality it will successfully reach the objectives that have been defined during presentation of the legislation and by the organizing committee.


Mr. Warren Allmand (Notre-Dame-de-Grace):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to express my enthusiasm for this bill. For the past few years I have been closely associated with young Canadians, both as a lecturer at college in Montreal, and this year by having the good fortune of being president of the Canadian Newman Club. I have also in past years worked closely with the World University Service of Canada and the International Student Centre in Montreal.
I want to assure the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) and the government that young Canadians welcome this legislation and the opportunities it will present. For many years they have been interested in international service. As far back as 1948 the World University Service of Canada initiated international seminars held in other countries to study the problems of those countries. This year such a seminar is being held in Turkey.
When the Peace Corps was established in the United States many university students and others in Canada looked forward to the day when we could have a similar organization here. As a matter of fact many Canadians attempted to become involved in the Peace Corps. Immediately following that time CUSO was started and, as has been mentioned, has already done a great deal of work in this field.
I am glad to see that clause 2(e) provides that all ages and classes of Canadians will be able to associate themselves with The Company of Young Canadians. In an earlier speech I pointed out that there are many older people, especially people who have retired from the professions, people who have made their mark in Canadian life, such as doctors, teachers, lawyers and engineers, who still have a lot of good work left in them and who have indicated they would like to go abroad and to other parts of Canada to help those who need help.
6272	COMMONS
Company of Young Canadians
I was also glad to hear the Prime Minister say that many non-university graduates have applied to work with the company. It would be a great mistake if it were to be dominated by university graduates. I hope in years to come the company will embrace young tradesmen, young farmers, 4-H workers, and just plain workers who can play a part in the program.
As a lawyer I am interested in seeing a project established similar to that of the neighbourhood law office in the United States. If we could get law students, young law graduates and other interested people to give legal assistance to people who cannot afford it, this would be a useful project.
It would also be a good idea, since many organizations of this type are being formed throughout the world, if we could work in conjunction with them, to the extent of forming an international youth corps. Once we get started we should approach the Peace Corps in the United States and similar corps throughout the world, to form international teams to work in other countries.
In other words, instead of having Canadian teams or American teams working abroad, we could have teams composed of volunteers from Canada, the United States, France, Germany and England. We could even invite Americans to come into Canada to work with young Canadians in the north, and send Canadians to work with the Peace Corps in the United States. This would promote an international rather than a national spirit.
It has been said that The Company of Young Canadians may provide young Canadians of the sixties with the same sort of opportunities to serve in an idealistic way that armies did in past years and centuries. However, I would hate to view Canadians serving abroad in a nationalistic or paternalistic way, and that is why I hope some day to see this work being done on an international basis.


Mr. Heath Macquarrie (Queens):: Mr. Speaker, I too want to add my voice in enthusiastic support of this measure, and I congratulate the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) and the government for bringing it forth.
Unlike the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Brewin) I will not apologize for my old age, because I have not attained that. I hope to live so long that some day I will be as old as I look, but right now I am in the middle age range where I can view this youth-age tension very dispassionately. However, I did

DEBATES	June 10, 1966
feel some sense of relief when the Prime Minister said there was no upper age limit because, after all, we here do not have very good job security.
This is an impressive move. In some ways it may mark a measure of what might be described as our spiritual maturing, something we have been doing of late in Canada, in that we are concerned to give of our time, our thought and our mental ingenuity to measures like this. This is something which invites and indeed invokes "constructive adventure"-I like that expression of the Prime Minister-on the part of those who are young in years, young in spirit and enthusiastic in endeavour.
The program of the company will provide what we all need, whether we are young, old or middle aged, namely, participation in a meaningful cause, and life is empty indeed if we do not have that. It will also offer opportunities for powerful and purposeful collective activity. We cannot function in isolation; we want to move in groups.
I am impressed and enthusiastic about what has already been done on an interim basis. Since the legislation could not be brought forward when it should have been, it was wise that measures were taken so that valuable and useful time was not lost. The symbol adopted by the company on an interim basis is a most impressive one-the maple key which identifies members of the company, the key which holds the seed for the future. It is a very Canadian symbol, a very meaningful symbol.
[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)
In my opinion this deserves great commendation. We are supposed to be a most unimaginative people, we Canadians, but here I think we have shown some real imagination. The seeds will be spread far and wide and I know the returns will be even greater than the beauty of our national emblem. I think too that some of the publications which have been put out by the interim organization should be commended-"better worlds don't just happen, they're made". It continues:
And better worlds are needed-for Canadians in a city slum, on a depressed farm, on an Indian reserve, in a home for the aged.
A better world is needed by people who are poor, under-educated, badly housed; people whose lives open no horizons and whose children have little hope.
This is compelling and appealing. The Company of Young Canadians wants to do something about this world, a world which includes Canada and the developing countries overseas. Now this is only an
June 10, 1966

Idea, but it will be more than an idea when its members go where they have been asked to help, perhaps to a community among the Eskimos or to a slum area where people live eight to a room.
This is an exciting prospect, Mr. Speaker, and I know we all want to accelerate the legislative process of this measure. When we come to the more detailed examination of the legislation we may find things to comment on. I am very impressed with the interim group, but I am sorry there is not a Prince Edward Islander involved. I hope this will be looked after and I have been given the assurance that it will.
These tensions between the generations are not new. Sometimes one reads scare headlines. I have some of them before me. Someone fears a youth rebellion; someone fears a student rebellion. This is not new. Nor is ours the only age where the young have desired and attained leadership. Pitt was prime minister when he was 24. Robespierre was through his bloody and brutal career when 26. Saint-Just had bestrode many of the institutions and too many people and was through at 21. Alexander was very young. Then there was Burns and Mozart. Bonnie Prince Charlie was only 27 when he almost conquered a kingdom which was rightfully his. My colleague reminds me of Robbie Burns whose life gave his fellows great riches and beauty. He was a great benefactor of all mankind and was gone in his thirties.
I am not at all worried. Here I join myself with the views of the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Brewin). I am not concerned about the inadequacy of the response which the young people of this country will give to what in fact are strenuous and difficult challenges. I say this not because it is a good thing to say of such a measure, nor because it is the kind of easy happy platitude one should drop about such a thing. I have spent most of my life in university classrooms. Since coming here I have formed a close association with the youth sector of our own party. I am greatly buoyed by the fact that I know so well the young people of our particular party, and I am sure we are not unique in that sense. So I speak from knowledge of our young people.
The hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Thompson) staked out some areas of tremendous challenge for the company when it becomes fully operative. I believe that many of the members of this house only recently are becoming aware of the needs, challenges and opportunities among the Indian people of
Company of Young Canadians our country. I must confess I have learned a great deal from such members as the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen), the former member for the Northwest Territories, the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Howard) and various others who have brought to our attention the tremendous compelling needs which exist. Then one thinks of the great vastness to the north and all that can be done, must be done and should be done there. Here in these two areas alone, without moving on to broad horizons in the external field, we have some powerful challenges.
I am glad we have good reason for faith that such a company, as the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) said of young people and young Canadians, can meet. There have been many reasons for making this assertion. Ever so often I hear from some of my former students who are in various parts of the world pushing back the frontiers of ignorance or disease, making magnificent contributions, and revealing the best that Canada has done for them. I do hope as the years go by that the private sector of our society will take a great interest, both in a tangible and intangible way, in this development. As I look at the legislation, which is something which not only legislators but all Canadians should be proud of, I see many opportunities.
Although there is much more I could say, because I want to be brief I will simply end as I began in pledging my complete and thorough-going support for this measure. It is not often one on the opposition side is able so wholeheartedly to endorse what emanates from the other side. I think all of us will look back upon this afternoon as one which in later years we may point to with real pride and deep satisfaction.


Mr. Ian Watson (Chaleauguay-Huniingdon-Laprairie):: Mr. Speaker, I have some comments I should like to make on this bill, but I am prepared to make them in committee if the house is prepared to go into the committee stage at this time. I believe they are in respect of clause 2 of the bill. I wonder whether this meets with the approval of the house, or would it be preferable that we continue with the general statements at this stage?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, I think the opposition would accept this proposal. Does the hon. member wish to make his remarks on the first item?


Lawrence E. Watson: Yes.
June 10, 1966

Company of Young Canadians


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: We do have one speaker who I think can finish before five o'clock, and then we could go into the committee stage, if this is agreeable.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is the house ready for the question?


Some hon. Members:: Yes.
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)


Mr. David MacDonald (Prince):: Mr. Speaker, if it is agreed, I should like to make a few remarks before we go into committee. I do not wish to go over again what I think has been stated very well by other hon. members, and that is the enthusiasm with which I think all greet this bill. It is important however that we ask ourselves for a moment why in fact we are doing this. It must seem to some of us at least, when we think about it objectively that we are witnessing here this afternoon a very strange process by which we are giving effect to a bill having to do with an item of interest and concern, primarily never before recognized as part and parcel of government responsibility. Indeed, I must say that what we are doing is much more closely akin to the profession with which I am normally associated, that of the clergy, for it seems to me we are dealing with missionaries and missionary tasks.
I have had to ask myself time and again why it is that governments and government agencies are becoming more and more caught up in human relations, or the development of society in terms of man's relationship with his fellowman. It is fair to say, I think, that in our time we have seen a rapid expansion of interest and concern in this whole area of man's endeavour, and I point out that this is both an exciting and terrifying prospect. Certainly anyone who has read some of what used to be at least avant garde literature such as the writings of Orwell and Huxley about our attempts to design and control man's social relationships, must realize that there would be no future freedoms if we carried this too far.
We must have some expression of concern as to how much in fact we hope, either through direct government intervention or through the establishment of certain crown corporations, to affect the lives of people and the communities in which they live. It must always be the concern of those who represent people in parliaments of the nations, the legislatures of the provinces and councils of the municipalities and townships, to be very sure that when they seek to move into the 
area of human relationships they do not in any way remove from individuals and individual social groups the freedoms that are rightfully theirs.
We must ask ourselves a rhetorical question this afternoon. In our intense anxiety to provide positive and constructive opportunities for young people to participate in nation building or working with the poor, why in fact do we feel called upon to do so? Is it because we are afraid of the restless driving energy of youth, which we are not always sure we can control to our advantage; is it because we feel it is safer to offer opportunities such as these, which may or may not be "safe", or is it, on the other hand, a sign of a failure in our time?
We live in an age of tremendous intercommunication between man, yet in an age in many ways, particularly in our western world, where there seems to be a great lack of confidence in the democratic system and in man's own ability to govern himself responsibly. I would hate to think that we are going to funnel off the vibrant and creative energy of our young people into a number of projects here, there and across the country, and thus deflect the interests of the young people in this country, who primarily must get caught up at some point in the process of governing themselves.
It is somewhat tragic to think of the tremendous cynicism that has developed, particularly among our young people today, regarding the way we govern ourselves, when we are in fact trying to provide opportunities for our youth to participate in this country, not in a democratic process, per se, but through a number of projects which we might assign to them.
These things are all of importance, and I mention them not to paint some dark and gloomy picture of the work that a Company of Young Canadians must do, but so that they can be seen in the context of our Canadian society at the present time. This is not too happy a picture in some ways, but it is a picture which depends to a degree on the objectivity and courage of youth; and if there are weaknesses in the structure of this place and in our system of government it will be not only the wisdom of experience here but the audacity of youth that will change it.
Let us not think that by the creation of a Company of Young Canadians we are going in any sense to offer youth the most important or worth-while role they can play, because in my own mind there may become a
June 10. 1966

much greater role for them in reshaping our country and giving it a new sense of purpose.
Let me now turn to the Company of Young Canadians as such. I can almost stand here this afternoon and say that it was my privilege to be somewhat of a pioneer Young Canadian in the work we attempted to do in Prince Edward Island. We did not have any name for the program as such, but I was fortunate in the parish work I did in Al-berton, Prince Edward Island, to have a parallel vision with both the people resident in that community, and particularly with the local Roman Catholic priest, Father Gerald Steele. We, too, were concerned with many of the things at the local community level that were unhealthy. We were concerned about the lack of educational standards, chronic unemployment, poor home management, lack of recreational facilities for youth and the mobility of only the best people out of the area, with little movement of constructive or helpful people into the area.
One of the things we found as we worked on this project during the past three and a half years was that this was an area in which there was need for great determination and intelligible leadership. Let me say at the outset that when I think of The Company of Young Canadians I am both heartened and disconcerted. I am heartened that there will be very shortly in the field a group of young people willing to wrestle with some of these most difficult problems, but I am very much aware of and disconcerted by the possibility that many of these young people may experience frustrating and disappointing involvements. It is all well and good to offer a program of six weeks training in human relationships to any person, but when it is realized that many of these deep seated social problems can only be dealt with effectively after the two years of service, it will be understood that these young volunteers may suffer terrific frustrations and disappointments.
Mr. Speaker, may I call it five o'clock.


Mr. Malheson:: Mr. Speaker, I wonder
whether the house would agree to continuing our consideration of this bill and dispensing with the private members' hour for today?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I agree, out of consideration for the Prime Minister.


John Ross Matheson: I thank the hon. member and the hon. member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters), in view of the fact we normally would be considering his private bill.
Company of Young Canadians


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. Does the house agree to continuing the consideration of the bill now before us and dispensing with the private members hour for today?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: I was saying, Mr. Speaker, that one of the real difficulties of participating in such a program is related to the very nature of the problems involved, because a high degree of frustration and disappointment will be created in almost every case. I am not deterred, nor will I allow myself to be depressed by this fact, for I feel there is enough realism and experience on the part of those who will develop this program that they can create a climate for those who will work in this company in which they will not expect or reach for those achievements which will lead to frustration.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)
I am concerned, however, in another field. It is one that I am sure will be referred to as we become more and more involved with The Company of Young Canadians. I refer to the calibre of those who will be allowed to participate. It has already been mentioned that the Canadian University Students Overseas, the CUSO program, has offered tremendous opportunities for service overseas for those who have completed or have gone a long way toward completing their university training. However, the fact of the matter is that we have a great number of people who are willing and able to serve, and who I am sure have already submitted applications to The Company of Young Canadians, who will not have this kind of academic background. Indeed, I am sure there will be many instances when academic training and qualifications will not be the prime criteria for effective service.
It has been my good fortune to work with people already in this area of human relationships who have made amazingly significant contributions without necessarily having the academic qualifications that we normally expect. We live in a degree-worshipping generation where, unless you can run a few letters after your name, you are almost not qualified to participate in these more or less esoteric involvements. We must not let our fetish for degrees curb our insight into solving some of these very real problems.
I would hope, too, that when the program gets into high gear it will have a minimum of partisan and political interference. I say this because I think, by its very nature, this
June 10. 1966

Company of Young Canadians program could become the greatest political football in many years. This would be a tragedy, because no generation is more acutely aware of partisan or political influence than youth, and none will become more cynical and despairing of the program than young people being manipulated for this kind of purpose.
It is important for another reason, too, that the program become as independent as it possibly can, because as the Prime Minister said it must have a maximum amount of independence and must be encouraged to be experimental as well as responsible. The very fact that the prime part of this program will move into new and unknown areas will necessitate risks, and it will necessitate our acceptance of the fact that from time to time there will be failure; and it is a well known fact that governments, just like churches, are not prepared very often to accept failure.
I say to you, Mr. Speaker, that some of the most glorious things that may happen under this program will be, not its successes but its failures, because it will be willing to take the risks in the projects put forward that no other agency or group is willing to take-and that will be all to its credit. We must consider that The Company of Young Canadians may be most responsible when they are taking some of the greatest risks.
It is my conviction that, while it is easy now to say that this may be a program patterned after those of other nations, The Company of Young Canadians may yet have something to offer the young people in our country, namely an opportunity to serve in an exciting and creative way. We seem to be most anxious to praise the programs of other countries, and institutions which put forward this kind of altruistic endeavour; but I am hopeful, both because of the calibre of the men who are connected in the initial stages with this program and because of the general nature of this legislation, that The Company of Young Canadians will offer young people a chance to participate effectively in the development of this nation in the second century of its history.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, I will take up just three minutes of the time of the house, if you do not mind. I just wish to express my support for the principle and purpose of this bill and say at the same time that I agree wholeheartedly with the introductory remarks of the hon.


member for Prince (Mr. MacDonald) when he said in effect that we must not depend entirely upon legislation to lead people to the Kingdom of Heaven. Then later on the hon. member made further remarks with which I entirely agree.
I heard the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) say that this was considered to be experimental legislation, and I do hope the government does not plunge into something in the nature of a big production in an effort to make a show, as it were, as far as the public is concerned. I hope the government treats it as an experiment, gradually enters into this field and widens its activities as a result of the experience gained.
The other thing I wish to mention is this. The Prime Minister said that in the first year these people will work in Canada at the invitation of communities or organizations. I trust, knowing what rural people are like and what they have done, themselves, in many respects, that these groups will not go into any community without being firmly convinced that they have an invitation to take part in certain work or projects. I was also interested in the Prime Minister's statement that these young people will only undertake work that would not otherwise be done, so there is no question of taking employment from the people or anything of that sort. I trust that particular attention will be paid to these matters because I think that in the long run success will come from moving carefully forward as the result of experience gained by those undertaking this work.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is the house ready for the question?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Batten in the chair.
On clause 2-Definitions.
John Ross Matheson: Mr. Chairman, if I may speak just briefly on this clause I should like to express on behalf of the Prime Minister, who regrettably had to be absent at this time, his appreciation for the quality of co-operation in this very important debate. I know that some hon. members who have spoken could have continued at very much greater length, but certainly the quality of the speeches we have heard today augurs well for this brave new company.
It is my feeling, sir, as a person who is no longer young yet perhaps not really old, that this present generation, this nest of young
June 10. 1966

eagles who from the standpoint of some of us have known only peace and luxury, the children of this affluent society, have insight into social problems both national and international to a degree not evidenced by any of their ancestors. We see in the young people in our high schools and universities a generation which appreciates that mankind does not possess the earth but holds it only in trust. Today we have the opportunity, through this legislation, to establish a corporation for those of them who dare to show their feelings for this nation and for the world.
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
We have all kinds of caring. A few days ago I was in my own area, in Smiths Falls, and I visited the Ontario Hospital for Retarded Children. I watched, fascinated, as one small child, with a part of one arm, lovingly fed a less fortunate spastic child spoonfuls of porridge. I was impressed with some of the things I heard from the hon. member for Qu'Appelle about the problems of spastics and other unfortunates. Then, of course, at the very head of our Canadian family we have people like the Vaniers who regard humanity as a family, and life itself as a stewardship and trust. This is an opportunity for our young people, with their time, their talent or their money, to give of themselves more generously than any of us since we, in past generations, have been impelled only to heed the call of country or the world in time of war.
Last night I was looking at a translation of Dag Hammarskj old's "Markings" by Leif Sjoberg. Shortly after his appointment as Secretary General, Hammarskjold wrote for a radio program of Edward R. Murrow the following:
From generations of soldiers and government officials on my father's side I inherited a belief that no life was more satisfactory than one of selfless service to your country

or humanity. This service required a sacrifice of all personal interests, . . .
From scholars and clergymen on my mother's side I inherited a belief that, in the very radical sense of the Gospels, all men were equals as children of God-
Here we have, just before the centennial of our confederation, an opportunity for a generation which sometimes we find frightening in their directness, a generation which believes very much in involvement with mankind, for those who dare to show their feelings for this nation's life, to give themselves to every interest, organization, society and group, its men, women and above all its
Company of Young Canadians children. This is an opportunity for those who conceive of the human race as the only race that matters, and each member thereof as being a part of the family of God. As we move into the study of this bill clause by clause, all of us ought to salute this company of happy warriors.


Lawrence E. Watson: No measure announced by the
government during the past three years has been received as warmly as the announcement the government made last year in the Throne Speech indicating its intention to establish The Company of Young Canadians as a vehicle to harness the enthusiasm and imagination of Canadian youth, and of older Canadians who are at least young in spirit. Canadian youth served Canada and the world during the war years in the defence of democracy. Since the war, succeeding generations of Canadian youth have lacked the opportunities for service such as The Company of Young Canadians is going to provide.
Certain cynics have been quick to point out that the C.Y.C. is a Canadian copy of the United States Peace Corps. If any group or body can claim parenthood for the Peace Corps or The Company of Young Canadians I think, as the hon. member for Greenwood pointed out, it is the Christian churches of the world who for centuries have sent missionaries out in the service of others. I am confident that the C.Y C. will remain, in structure, organization and the type of project it will embark upon, strictly Canadian. It will reflect Canadian circumstances, Canadian abilities and Canadian needs. Canada today is in a position to supply teachers, technicians, doctors and nurses to serve in the underdeveloped countries of the world in two major languages.

French Canadians have a particularly significant role to play in Africa, in southeast Asia and in Latin America.
Up to now, the Canadian effort among the new French speaking African nations has been quite inadequate. These people have an urgent need for teachers and technicians to activate their development. Would not the dispatch of such personnel be the ideal way for us to fill the gap and, at the same time, show the interest of our country?
1English1
In its first year of operation, the C.Y.C. has wisely decided to limit itself to projects within Canada. The government has, in the past
June 10. 1966

Company of Young Canadians year, radically expanded its aid to CUSO, the Canadian University Service Overseas. CUSO has developed, over the past few years, into a very successful, privately supported Peace Corps type operation. The government has obviously decided that rather than have C.Y.C. set up a parallel external program, it would work initially through CUSO. I disagree with the hon. member for Red Deer in that I sincerely hope it is not the government's or C.Y.C.'s intention to channel their future external efforts through CUSO. If my opinion is correct, the persons sent to underdeveloped countries through the CUSO program have been teachers, doctors, nurses or medical technicians. In my opinion, we should continue to make use of CUSO in so far as this category of volunteer is concerned, but I would strongly urge the C.Y.C. to branch into the external field in other categories of volunteer work.
I would include amongst these categories, although I certainly do not believe they are absolute, technicians, farmers, engineers and personnel trained in community development work. The most pressing need in the world today is food. With a program designed to attract young Canadian farm people, I am confident that the C.Y.C. could make a contribution to the world's fight against hunger.
Internally, The Company of Young Canadians program, except where the provinces indicate otherwise, should be limited to those areas within federal jurisdiction. One area which has not been mentioned as a possible region for The Company of Young Canadians endeavour is our prison system. There is a desperate need in Canada for parole officers. I am personally convinced that here is an area of social reform in which The Company of Young Canadians could perform very necessary services immediately, with perhaps a minimum of training. Obviously parole officers do need some training, but I think a short briefing would provide parole officers in numbers which perhaps could not be provided in any other way.
[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)
So far as the announced intention of The Company of Young Canadians is in the area of federal jurisdiction concerning our Indian and Eskimo population, I think there should be a warning issued that the company should send persons only to those Indian reservations to which they are invited. I hope they will be able to find young Indians and Eskimos to do this volunteer work. There is no question whatever that a young Indian

would be just as effective as any other young Canadian as a C.Y.C. volunteer on an Indian reserve. I think other government departments should be making use of the type of volunteer who comes to the C.Y.C. There is for example the Indian affairs branch, which could ask the C.Y.C. whether it has come across volunteer teachers who might be anxious to go into the north to teach. The C.Y.C. itself does not have room for all the volunteer services offered to it. Perhaps it could act in the capacity of agent for other government departments.
It is my conviction that in these northern areas a teacher must not only be a teacher but must be motivated if she is to do a good job. There is no doubt that the people who are applying as volunteer teachers to the C.Y.C. are motivated, and I am convinced that if they had the training the Indian affairs branch could use them immediately, this year, if the C.Y.C. does not find space for them within their own organization. There should be close liaison between the Indian affairs branch and the C.Y.C., and between the department of northern affairs and the C.Y.C.
The establishment of The Company of Young Canadians is the right kind of therapy for the youth of this country, which in its introversion and preoccupation with Canada's internal problems is losing sight of the role which Canada should be playing in the world. By making use of the awakening of social responsibilities which has occurred among Canadians of all ages since world war II, with an effective internal program, and by employing imagination, skills, vigour and the enthusiasm of Canadians of all ages in the battle against human ignorance and poverty in other less fortunate lands, we will be fulfilling man's highest purpose, the creation of that ultimate ideal

a world of justice where the ability to live in human dignity is not just the privilege of the fortunate few, but is available to men of all nations.
By looking beyond our frontiers, and possessing the advantages of two of the world's greatest languages and cultures, The Company of Young Canadians can make a real contribution to the world. By working together at the international level in the cause of a better world, young Canadians will acquire an outlook and an experience which, when brought back to Canada, will strengthen our national unity and contribute to our national pride.
June 10, 1966	COMMONS


Mr. Patterson:: Mr. Chairman, I just want to make a few remarks on the measure which is now before us. It is not my intention to delay the committee to any considerable degree.
A young person trying to give an answer to the charge that young people were without purpose at the present time stated that, after all, there were no great challenges left in the world for them. I have never agreed with that particular explanation of the situation because I believe that in every generation there have been tremendous challenges before people if they would only become aware of them.
However, I do believe that in the presentation of this particular measure this afternoon and in the establishment of this Company of Young Canadians it may somehow or other present to young people another challenging avenue of service that will catch their imagination and give them some purpose and objective in life.
Our generation in this age has been characterized in various ways. It has been characterized as materialistic, thinking only of dollars and cents, losing sight of the intangibles, the human resources and the spiritual factors that make life worth living. It has been characterized as a selfish age in which people are concerned only with themselves and are not thinking of others. It has been characterized as an age of youthful irresponsibility. But I do not believe that these are true characterizations in all respects.
I think the challenge offered by the concept of this Company of Young Canadians is the repudiation of these characteristics and the demonstration of their opposites-the recognition of human values and the needs of those round about us, the challenge of those intangibles that mean so much to our day and to any generation. So that I believe that this is a challenge to the personality of those who will be participating in this program. Those young people and others who accept this challenge and give themselves in service will benefit in the development and enrichment of their own lives.
In addition, as has been pointed out today on a number of occasions, they will assist in an enlarged program of bringing assistance to those who, perhaps, are less fortunate and have not had the similar opportunities for development that others have had. As has been said today, this is not a new concept. We can go back many generations and find that this concept has been in operation in
DEBATES	6279
Company of Young Canadians various ways and in various manners. But we hope and believe that this Company will provide another medium by which this particular factor can be demonstrated, as people go out to give themselves in service to others.
There are two or three specific matters to which I wish to refer briefly. One is that there is no inflexible age limit attached to this particular program. It has been stressed that the program has been especially built and designed for the participation of young people, and I recognize that they will provide the major source of assistance. But older people can still render invaluable service.
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)
A few months ago I, as well as other hon. members, had the opportunity of spending a few days in the West Indies. It was my privilege to spend three days in Montserrat before proceeding to Jamaica, where the C.P.A. conference was being held. I had the opportunity of talking with a Canadian there at the time-possibly he is still there-who was engaged in one of the assistance programs. He told me his particular responsibility was teacher training activities, but he said his hands were tied owing to the fact that young people at about grade seven or eight would leave school and be immediately absorbed into the teaching profession. He said: "It is practically impossible for me to get these young people together for training because there is no one to take their place". He pointed out that if perhaps retired people could come down and put in several weeks, or three or four months, substituting in the schools on a voluntary basis, there would be great benefit to all concerned. He said that, perhaps because there is a desire for service, he could bring these people in and subject them to an intensive teacher training course extending over several weeks to enable them to take their place much more efficiently as teachers of the children of this area.
I thought to myself that a wonderful demonstration of good will could be made in a situation like that, where older people, and perhaps retired school teachers who yet were willing to give a few more years, or even months of service, perhaps on a voluntary basis, were willing to participate in an operation such as this. This would give them a splendid opportunity for making a contribution in this particular area.
I could multiply instances such as that, referring to other particular needs in Montserrat, and of course to other areas of the West Indies as well that need help. I trust
June 10, 1966

Company of Young Canadians that individuals in the categories I have mentioned, who are willing to give their services to assist in some particular respect, will be given the opportunity to do so.
I also hope that it will not be just those who have university training who will have the opportunity of making a contribution. It has been stressed many times that only a small proportion of Canadians graduate from university. None the less, there are many people who are almost experts in many fields. There are technicians, agricultural workers, vocational workers, and so on who fit into that category. Such people can still make a tremendous contribution in their particular fields. I trust that this challenge will be made available to them as well, and that they may fit into this particular program and serve as they wish to serve.
I am not going to say any more along that line, Mr. Chairman. I do not want to hold up the committee on this bill. I did want to make a few remarks in support of the principle of the measure that is now before us.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall clause 2 carry?


Mr. Peters:: Mr. Chairman, I want to add a word or two to what has been said. I am very pleased with the debate that has taken place, and what has been said by most hon. members about the hopes and aspirations of The Company of Young Canadians.
I,	too, hope that the emphasis will not be on education, but rather on the work that can be done for those who are less fortunate, whether in Canada or in other parts of the world. There is nothing more sanctimonious than a young person just out of college. You can see him going into rural Canada, or one of the northern areas, and trying to assist someone. I think he will have his rough edges taken off, rather than being able to provide assistance for others.
This afternoon a young member of the company visited my office. I asked her if they were already at work, and she said that they already had two people in the field. This is the type of enthusiasm that is welcome and very valuable.
I keep thinking of a saying used by Charlie Millard, when he was Canadian director of the United Steel Workers of America. He used to come to area council meetings, and to local union meetings asking for support for the international free trade unions. He encouraged a program of supplying educational facilities and technical facilities to underdeveloped countries, and was trying to

raise money from the people such as I represented in the labour movement-miners and others with no education at all. His concentration always was on the practical advantage that could be provided to the areas he wanted to help. He always managed to gain support for programs similar to those to be undertaken by The Company of Young Canadians. He always said that if the doors are thrown open wide enough, surprising things will come from the most unexpected sources. That is a very broad translation, probably, of a famous statement.
I hope that those charged with the operation of The Company of Young Canadians will keep in mind problems facing children today, particularly of those who do not know what to do at university, and who listen to the teacher saying to them, "This profession is worth a minimum of $20,000 and a maximum of $70,000 a year, and this one is in another minimum and maximum category". These students want to choose a profession, not because they like it, but because it will be a good money producer.
This sort of thing is common in most of our universities, as it is in the teaching profession. I can see a role in The Company of Young Canadians for those young people who have finished high school and who do not know what they want to do. By serving with the company, by being allowed to work with other people, they will be able to learn the needs of other people and at the same time develop in themselves a certain amount of dedication to humanity which will enable them to choose a profession to provide the greatest benefit to the people they will serve, whatever the profession may be.
The benefits accruing from The Company of Young Canadians will be twofold. While benefits will flow to those being served, a great deal of advantage will come to the volunteers, who will learn the needs of other people, and who will thereby develop a certain amount of humility.
Most young people today are products of an affluent society. You give them an allowance, not because they really need it, but because you want to get rid of them. Everybody is too busy to be a boy scout leader to the youth of today. The Company of Young Canadians will develop humility in the volunteers and, as the hon. member for Prince said, will enable those volunteers to grow up and serve in a role that is much needed throughout the world today. Many
June 10, 1966	COMMONS
young people have had a very narrow education, because they have not had to rub shoulders with those much poorer than themselves. This program will broaden their outlook.
We should be flexible enough to extend the program as rapidly as the need for it arises. We should be prepared to enter into many fields. If The Company of Young Canadians has a program which is imaginative and if it is willing to accept people who have something to offer, Canada will reap an immense benefit in our lifetime from the formation of this company. Although service with the company will terminate after two years, the advantages of having served different types of people, and the humility coming from that, will stand the volunteers and this country in good stead. They will be able in some way to dispel the myth which has grown up in the minds of many young Canadians that money is good, that to be rich is good, and that anyone who is not rich is obviously no good.
[DOT] (5:40 p.m.)
I look forward to a time in the not too distant future when young people returning from parts of Canada far from where they were born, and indeed from travel throughout the world in connection with this organization, will enter the political world, offer themselves for election and bring to this house their desire to get ahead and extend throughout our whole population the benefits which this society can bring. This they will be better able to do on the basis of their service and of their experience during their years with the Young Canadians.


Mr. Reid:: As the youngest member in the house and as one who is very interested in this field, I do not think I should neglect this opportunity to say a few brief words.
Young people today are very suspicious of the generation ahead of them. For this reason I think the government was wise to provide that control of this organization should remain with the young people themselves, so that they might not be overshadowed by their elders telling them to do this, to do that or, what is more likely, not to do this or not to do that.
If The Company of Young Canadians is to be a success it must create a disturbance. It must go into areas of our society where there is darkness, offering a gleam of hope. For too long we have been hearing about ways of improving productivity, increasing our gross national product and making bigger things bigger. We have now reached a stage in our
DEBATES	6281
Company of Young Canadians development where we should think of the inner side of man and consider his spiritual needs, because it is not money alone which satisfies our hopes and desires.
There are many in our society who have not enjoyed the opportunity, to develop as they ought. There has been a great deal of wasted human material. The Company of Young Canadians is an instrument which Canadian society can use to improve the whole of society and give a better chance to those areas which are below our national standards. The company will make a great many mistakes. Many questions will be asked in this house because of those mistakes. But we should realize that it is moving into relatively new fields and we must give it as much scope as possible in order that it may conduct its important experiments.
Above all, I feel The Company of Young Canadians is a challenge to the youth of Canada. They will go through a unique experience as a result of which they will have a wider knowledge of the variety of the human condition. And what is even more important, perhaps they will have a better understanding of themselves and of the society in which they live.
There will be problems. There will be set-backs. At times these volunteers will be very depressed. But as it is said, we learn very little from success in comparison with what we learn in defeat. I wish these volunteers well as they go out on this noble experiment. I hope they will consider themselves as people who are setting out to improve the lives and the physical conditions of others. It is not in material possessions that true happiness is to be found. Volunteers must have faith, and faith requires a great deal of courage. It consists of the ability to take a risk-a readiness to accept pain and disappointment. Whoever in the company insists on safety and security as a primary condition of an operation will be a failure. Nobody is so secure as when he is dead- and we want to improve the lives of the people.


Stanley Howard Knowles: There are only a few words I should like to say at this point. The speeches on this subject this afternoon have been excellent and I think the philosophy behind this bill has been put on the record in very eloquent terms.
I liked the words which were spoken by the youngest member of the house just now, particularly his statement that we wish these volunteers well. If we are to wish them well,
June 10, 1966

Company of Young Canadians if we intend to give this project our backing, then one of the ways of doing it is by improving our legislation in the very field in which we expect these young people to make progress.
The Prime Minister indicated that their purpose would be to engage in a war on poverty, disease and illiteracy. If their job is to try to do something about these evils, to improve the living conditions of our people both physically and culturally; if their job is to try to do something about the health and the security of people at home and abroad, I trust we shall not think that having turned this task over to the young Canadians there is nothing further for us to do here.
It is obvious that these remarks could be a prelude to a full-dress speech on medicare, housing, rural development, education, urban redevelopment and so on. I shall not make such a speech. I ask that it be taken as read. But I would suggest that what we are doing by setting up this company of young Canadians makes it even more important that we should legislate, here, to improve conditions in the very field in which we expect these young Canadians to work. We' are not by this measure getting rid of jobs we should be doing in this parliament.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clause 3 agreed to.
On clause 4-Council established.
Mrs. Maclnnis (Vancouver-Kingsway):: I
welcome this bill. I have no intention of speaking at any length, but I think there must be an improvement in the way in which this legislation is finally carried out. I do not wish to propose any amendment, because the Secretary of State has said exactly what I think about an amendment of this type: I do not think it is possible to legislate the type of improvement about which I wish to speak.
However, I think it is exceedingly regrettable that out of the 18 people who were asked to serve on the interim committee of the council only one is a woman. I do not intend to make a feminist speech, but I do wish to place on record correspondence which was sent to me precisely for that purpose by the education officer in the Women's Bureau of Ontario, a lady who is also a member of the national Y.M.C.A

This is a letter to the Prime Minister written on April 18, and it reads:
Dear Sir:
This morning's announcement of your appointment of 18 members to the provisional advisory council of The Company of Young Canadians prompts me to comment and to ask some obvious questions.
[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)
That one woman only should have been appointed among the 18 hardly seems representative of the competence and experience available from one half of our population. Were groups such as the National Council of Women, the local welfare councils of communities across Canada or the Young Women's Christian Association asked to submit names of young women experienced in the training and use of volunteers? Your own Department of Citizenship and Immigration could supply you with any number of names of capable women just as capable, I suggest, as some of the male appointees who have not the same experience planning and working with young volunteers.
As a member of the women's bureau of the Ontario Department of Labour I visit high schools throughout our province discussing with young women their educational, vocational and future plans. Almost inevitably the question arises about the possibilities of volunteer work or commitment in their plans. This experience has convinced me of the interest present for the Company of Young Canadians with one half of the age group you hope to reach. The fact that one half of the CUSO volunteers now serving are female further substantiates this fact.
That your appointments have not taken greater cognizance of both this interest and existing competence is most disappointing.
Yours very truly,
(Mrs.) David A. A. Stager.
The Prime Minister replied to that letter on April 27 as follows:
Dear Mrs. Stager:
Thank you for your letter of April 15, in which you express your disappointment in the number of women appointed to the interim advisory council of The Company of Young Canadians. It is indeed regrettable that it was possible to appoint only one woman, but unfortunately not all of those invited to serve on the interim advisory council found themselves free to do so. I wish to assure you that this situation does not reflect any lack of interest in recruiting women as members of the company.
The interim council is, of course, functioning only temporarily. 1 hope that it will be superseded by a permanent council after parliament has passed legislation formally establishing the Company of Young Canadians. At that stage, I would certainly expect that the proportion of men and women would better reflect both the membership and the keen influence of women in the work of the company.
Yours sincerely,
L. B. Pearson
It must have been a very hurried and inadequate search if the government was not able to find more than one woman sufficiently qualified to be a member of the interim
June 10, 1966	COMMONS
council. Half the volunteers in CUSO are women, and the permanent council of The Company of Young Canadians should be composed of women on something like a 50-50 basis. This is important not on a sex basis but on the basis of dealing with the population in equal proportion.
The government should make up its mind that it is going to find about half of the permanent council among young women. Some young women have disabilities, such as working with young families, which prevent them undertaking this work; but there are plenty of others, equally as competent as young men, and trained for this type of work.
I urge the government to get rid of this lopsided nature of the council and make the permanent body more representative. Women's organizations across Canada are watching this, and the organizations of the younger women are deeply concerned.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clause 5 agreed to.
On clause 6-Vacancy.
Mr. MacLean (Queens):: This clause states that a vacancy in the membership of the council does not impair the right of the remainder to act. What does this mean? Does it mean that the council must consist of 14 members, that it cannot have more than one vacancy at a time, or does vacancy include more than one member and, if so, how many?


John Ross Matheson: Vacancy would cover one or more members, and a vacancy could occur for any number of reasons.


John Angus MacLean: Could the council get down to one member? Could it still act after attrition had reduced its membership to five?


John Ross Matheson: I am advised that this clause is a standard clause following the usual precedents. Of course there could be contingencies. We could have an earthquake or something extraordinary, but in the normal circumstances this is not the kind of thing that would develop. I am sure that what is produced here conforms to standard practice in draftsmanship.


[Stage Direction]
Clauses agreed to.
Clauses 7 to 9 inclusive agreed to.
On clause 10-Executive director.
David Samuel Horne MacDonald: There seems to be a mixture of philosophy at this point and it is
DEBATES	6283
Company of Young Canadians somewhat disconcerting. From the nature of the bill it seems the company becomes in effect the creature of the volunteers, which is part and parcel of the value of this program. But the executive director is to be appointed by the governor in council and will hold office during pleasure. Does this mean that the council will be relatively independent but that the executive director will not? In other words, while they might have a certain freedom of action they will have no control either to effect the appointment of a director or to terminate his appointment, should he no longer be compatible with the majority of the board of directors. I would like to see some way in which the director is responsible to the volunteers and the council.


John Ross Matheson: One of the interesting features of this legislation is that it provides for a majority of the governing body to be elected by the volunteers themselves. The power and the responsibility is squarely placed on youth. We know of no precedent for such a plan. This is not a government organization although most of its funds will be provided by the government. It is to be an independent organization, run by and with young people, for Canadians of every age. Subclause (2) says that the executive director is responsible for the management and supervision of the work and staff of the company under the direction of the council. I trust that this will work out in as effective a fashion as possible. After all what is happening, as I see it, is that the government is establishing a federal corporation, which then can be governed by youth to the extent of two-thirds of the executive body.
[DOT] (6:00 p.m.)


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Chairman, this is the whole point of the difficulty, inasmuch as it says in clause 2 that he is responsible not to the volunteers but, in terms of his appointment, to the governor in council. We have had experience with this. In practical matters, when you have a board of directors, despite the fact of whether or not they are appointed by volunteers, the guiding force at the various meetings will be that of the executive director. If the executive director is not ultimately responsible to the board of directors-these volunteer directors who are appointed-I can see a very nice situation developing where on the one hand the board of directors has reached a consensus on a point concerning the direction in which The Company of Young Canadians should go, but
June 10, 1966

Company of Young Canadians on the other hand since this person is not ultimately responsible to them, since they cannot terminate his appointment, the executive director is thus independent of them. Then we are back to what I do not think we want to see happen, and this is what it will come around to in terms of the appointment being by order of the governor in council.


Mr. Turner:: Mr. Chairman, may I answer this. The executive director is responsible for management to the 15-man council. Referring back to clause 4 we see that 10 members of this council shall be elected by the volunteer members and the governor in council is to appoint the executive director. Subsequent to that the executive director is responsible, in terms of management and supervision, to the council of which a majority will be elected or volunteer members.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Can the council on recommendation to the governor in council dismiss the executive director?


John Napier Turner: Since the governor in council appoints on the recommendation of the council and since the executive director holds office at their pleasure, I would assume it is a corollary of the clause that that would be the case.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I agree with the remarks of the hon. member for Prince. I think this is the decision we are now faced with so far as the C.B.C. is concerned, where the governor in council appoints the president, or in this case the managing director, and he in turn takes orders from the council, but the council has no control over him.
You arrive at a situation where the council is captive to the governor in council's appointment. The minister shakes his head; but I should point out that the same thing has happened in the C.B.C. the president, as well as his two colleagues, because of the method of appointments are no longer under the direction of the board of directors; they are not under the control of the board. The board of directors is under their control. This is the difficulty. I would think that perhaps the government should consider this, because obviously, the new legislation which they are going to bring down so far as the C.B.C. is concerned is going to take this matter into consideration. I believe it is going to be modified and in fact re-defined in the way the hon. member for Prince indicates. I do not think this is a matter in respect of which the minister should just get up and say


no. I think if he does he may have to say no in the other case and may find himself at cross-purposes. As I read the bill I believe the hon. member for Prince is interpreting it in the way it actually will be, and this is not necessarily the best way.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Chairman, while I appreciate the assistance the minister is attempting to give in this matter, I think we have hit at the nub of what is the essential problem. As my hon. friend from Queens mentioned to me, are we really willing to cut the umbilical cord? We have gone a long way toward this in establishing a board on which 10 members will be elected by the volunteers themselves. I think this is tremendous. I have had correspondence from church leaders since the introduction of this bill confirming this. This is the only way in which the tremendous public support which we anticipate for the bill will take place. If we even suggest we are going somehow to limit the freedom they have, we will destroy a good deal of the confidence in the minds of the youth. I have spent too many years in youth work not to know that young people want to be assured that there is not going to be this kind of interference. If in their wisdom in this council they make a decision to move in a certain direction with their program, then they must be assured that they will have the support of their executive director and that he will not have the freedom to contradict their very motives and aspirations. If there is any umbilical cord to be left, I think it should be left only at the point where there is control in respect of the actual allocation of the money by parliament. I think they will have to have this kind of assurance before we can expect the bill to have the effect we hope it will have.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, there are 15 more clauses in this bill and there are several members who wish to speak on several clauses. This is an important measure. I should like to call it six o'clock.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, on Monday we propose to submit the following business to the house, in this order: First, item No. 65 on today's order paper, the resolution concerning the Canada Student Loans Act; then item No. 63, second reading of Bill C-190, an act to amend the Bank of Canada Act; then
June 10, 1966



Item No. 51, second reading of Bill C-193 to amend the Public Service Superannuation Act; then item No. 64, second reading of the bill to amend the Bankruptcy Act.
On Tuesday we propose to submit to the Chouse for its consideration the two resolutions standing in the name of the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Mac-Eachen), item No. 45, the resolution concerning the Canada Assistance Plan, and item No. *66, the resolution having to do with the *establishment of a health resources fund.
Business of the House


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, will we proceed with these items on Tuesday, whether or not we have finished the business outlined for Monday?


George James McIlraith: I am unable to give a firm answer to that as yet, but I would expect so.


[Stage Direction]
It being twelve minutes after six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
June 10, 1966

[Stage Direction]
Press Communique MI (66)4

[Stage Direction]
For immediate release 8th June, 1966

[Stage Direction]
The Council met in Ministerial Session in Brussels, 7th and 8th June, 1966.
2.	The Council reviewed the state of the Alliance. After a frank exchange of views, Ministers agreed that the maintenance of the Atlantic Alliance is as necessary today as ever, in order to safeguard the freedom and the common heritage of their peoples founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. The first aim of the Atlantic Alliance is the common defence of all member countries; to this end its members are pledged, separately and jointly, by means of continuous and effective selfhelp and mutual aid, to maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.
3.	Ministers agreed to examine, in the light of the principles and obligations of the Treaty, and in a co-operative manner, the problems raised by the French memoranda of last March, in order to reach as soon as possible solutions acceptable to all concerned and which assure continued security. At this meeting the Council:
(a)	noted the statement made by Mr. Luns on the discussions which had taken place on 6th June among fourteen Ministers;
(b)	agreed to transfer the military headquarters of NATO from France;
(c)	extended a unanimous invitation to the Benelux countries to provide a new site for SHAPE;
(d)	agreed that some simplification of the Command Structure should be carried out. This will be achieved in the first instance in the Centre by combining under a single commander and in one headquarters the staffs now divided between the headquarters of the Commander-in-Chief, Central Europe, and the Commanders-in-Chief of the Land and Air Forces in Central Europe. This headquarters will be moved to a new location either in Benelux or Germany;
(e)	agreed that further studies will be necessary in order to establish the precise
requirements and the possibilities of hospitality in the different countries, noted that the Benelux countries, the Federal Republic, the Secretary General and the NATO Military Authorities had been requested to undertake these studies forthwith; and further noted that as soon as the required information was available, final decisions would have to be taken as a matter of urgency;
(f)	extended a unanimous invitation to Italy to provide a new site for the NATO Defence College;
(g)	agreed that the Standing Group will be abolished and replaced by appropriate alternative arrangements, including an integrated international Military Staff;
(h)	noted the statement by Mr. Luns in connection with the site of the Council and also the statement of the French Foreign Minister on this subject.
4.	With regard to the procedures for negotiation, Ministers agreed that;
(a)	the questions which need to be settled jointly between the Allies as a consequence of French communications will in the first instance be discussed in the Council in Permanent Session;
(b)	prominent among these questions are the tasks and missions of French forces in Germany, including their co-operation with NATO forces and command arrangements;
(c)	other questions such as French participation in NADGE and NATO infrastructure projects will be discussed in the same way;
(d)	the Council in Permanent Session may, of course, make any arrangements it wishes for discussion of these questions. It may, for example, decide to set up smaller groups to deal with some or all of the questions. When the political problems have been discussed and sufficient agreement reached on them, the elaboration of the necessary military arrangements will be referred to discussions between the French High Command and SACEUR;
(e)	if the Council in Permanent Session can make no progress, discussion will be resumed at Ministerial level.
5.	In reviewing the international situation Ministers discussed the relations of their countries with the Soviet Union and the East European countries.
June 10, 1966
[Stage Direction]
6.	In view of the basic aims of the Soviet Union, the level of its armed forces, and its continuing allocation of a high proportion of economic and technological resources for military purposes, the Ministers concluded that it is imperative for the west to maintain adequate forces for deterrence and defence.
7.	Ministers had an extended discussion about the main problems affecting European security. They reaffirmed the terms of their declaration of 16th December, 1958 with regard to Berlin. They regretted the absence of progress on the important question of German reunification and the continued attempts to discredit the Federal Republic of Germany. Taking note of the positive initiative taken by the German Government in their note of 25th March, 1966 Ministers reaffirmed that the solution of the German problem is one of the central issues in East-West relations, and they agreed on the necessity of a continued and unrelenting search for a peaceful solution that would give satisfaction to the German people's fundamental right to reunification.
8.	The defensive nature of the North Atlantic Treaty is indisputable. It is clearly stated in the undertaking by the signatories to uphold the principles of the United Nations Charter by refraining from the use of force to settle international disputes. Furthermore, the defensive character of the Alliance has been repeatedly proved by the restraint and moderation shown by its members in the last seventeen years, even when confronted by provocation and hostile actions affecting the Treaty area. Owing to the conditions of security created and maintained by an effective common defence of the North Atlantic area, political consultation among partners allows initiatives to be taken which can contribute not only to the stability of East-West relations but also to the general well-being of mankind.
9.	If progress is to be made with regard to the complex problems of a European settlement, a determination to resolve the issues must exist on all sides. The peaceful ending of the division of Europe remains a principal purpose of the Alliance, the objective being a Europe that will once again be one, and a Germany that will once again be united.
10.	Meanwhile, member countries are seeking further to improve relations .between the peoples of Eastern Europe and Western Europe, and to diminish mutual suspicions and fears. They are convinced that further tangible results could now be obtained in the
cultural, economic, scientific and technical fields.
11.	Ministers directed the Permanent Representatives to continue to examine closely the prospects of healthy developments in East-West relations, and to prepare a full report on these questions for meetings to be attended, as far as is practicable, by the Foreign Ministers of the various countries. This report, which should deal with all possible initiatives in this field, would cover, inter alia, problems connected with European security and German reunification.
12.	Ministers expressed their continuous interest in progress towards general, complete and controlled disarmament. They expressed great concern over the problem of nuclear proliferation in its world-wide implications and their determination to continue their efforts to solve this problem. In particular, the governments concerned in the 18-Power Geneva Conference reaffirmed their intention to do their utmost to achieve positive results.
13.	With regard to Greek-Turkish relations, Ministers took note of the Secretary General's report on the "Watching Brief" and confirmed their support for the continuation of his activities in this respect. They welcomed the announcement made by the Foreign Ministers of Greece and Turkey to the effect that "the Governments of Greece and Turkey, inspired by a sincere desire to facilitate a peaceful and agreed solution of the Cyprus problem and to improve their relations, have decided to proceed to contacts and exchanges of views on the Cyprus question and on Greek-Turkish relations. The procedure to be followed during these contacts will be decided in common". The ministers reiterated their appreciation of the continued presence of the United Nations Force in Cyprus and expressed their support of the efforts of the United Nations for safeguarding peace and improving the situation in the island.
14.	Ministers reaffirmed their desire to promote economic co-operation in the spirit of Article 2 of the North Atlantic Treaty. They acknowledged the need to join efforts in order to promote research in the scientific, technical and production fields, and achieve a wider co-operation and exchange of information so that in a world of rapid scientific progress the gap in technological achievement between Europe and North America can be narrowed.
[Stage Direction]
June 10, 1966
15.	All economically advanced countries, those of East and West alike, have a common responsibility to co-operate in attacking the fundamental problems confronting the developing countries. Progress toward political settlements and disarmament will contribute to this end by releasing resources and energies which are so badly needed for the advancement of human welfare.
16.	The Council, agreeing that efforts should be continued to supply Greece and Turkey with defence assistance within the framework of the Alliance, in order to help them maintain an effective contribution to the common defence, adopted a resolution recommending wider participation in this aid programme.
17.	Ministers received a progress report on the activities of the Special Committee of Defence Ministers which was created by the
Council in 1965. A further report will be submitted to the Council during the Ministerial session in December.
18.	In view of the importance of science and technology to the military strength of the Alliance and the economic vitality of its members, Ministers noted with satisfaction the recently agreed improvements in procedures for co-operation among members of the Alliance in research, development and production of military equipment. They encouraged member countries to bring suitable projects forward for co-operative action.
19.	They noted that a meeting of Defence Ministers will be convened in July to review and carry forward the institution of Force Planning procedures for projecting and adjusting annually a five-year program.
20.	A meeting of the Council at Ministerial level will be held in December 1966.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, June 13, 1966